Skip to main content

Full text of "Christian Union Quarterly"

See other formats




Herbert Lockwood Willett 

Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2012 with funding from 

CARLI: Consortium of Academic and Research Libraries in Illinois 


Editorial : 

Explorers in Christian Unity 9 

The Wrong and the Right I'.ethod of Seeking 

Christian Reunion. Alfred E. Garvie. 14 
The Doctrine of Priesthood, in the Episcopal 

Church. Francis >?. Hall. . 20 

Is the Organic Union of Protestantism Prac- 
ticable? Cyrus J. Kephart 34 

The Next Step Towards Christian Unity. 

J. H. Garrison. 44 

Towards Christian Unity. Report of the 

British Bub-Committee 49 

The Unity of Christendom. John Wakeford.. 55 
What People and Papers are Saying About 

Unity 59 

Letters to the Editor 71 

Book Reviews 77 


Editorial : 

Have Denominational Schools a Moral 

Hight of Existence?. 9 

The Principles of Christian Union. David 

Owen Thomas IE 

The Unifying Influence of Home Missions. 

Alfred Williams Anthony 24 

Some Thoughts on the Present Status of the 

Discussions on Organic Church Union 

From the Standpoint of the Moravian 

Church. Paul de Sehweinitz 50 

A Russian View of the World Conference. 

Robert H. Gardiner 36 

Octave of Prayer for Unity. 42 

The Tyranny of Triflers in Religion. 

Edp-ar DeWitt Jones .... 61 

What People and Papers are Saying About 

Unity m . . 67 

Letters to the Editor. . ". \ \ \ \ \ [ [ \ \ \ \ \ \ . \ . \ \ . 77 
Book Reviews 79 


Editorial : 

The Philadelphia Conference 9 

Another Doctrine of Priesthood in the Epis- 
copal Church. '.H. Griffith Thomas.... 15 

Spiritual Sanitation a Remedy for Disunion. 

J. B. Lehman 32 

Christian Unity Pulpit. 

The Divided Church and the Present 
• Crisis. Henry 0. Armstrong 40 

That People and Papers ere Saying Ahout 

Unity 47 

Letters to the Editor . 66 

Book Reviews 78 


Hecord of the Proceedings of the Philadel- 
phia Conference on Organiv Union 9 

Call for an Interdenominational Council 28 

Papers "by the Following: 

Rev. Wm. E. RoBerts, D. D 28 

Rev. Peter Ainslie, 1>« D 32 

Rev. William M. Anderson, D., J) 36 

Mr. George I [. Earner 39 

Bishop C. '. Koench, u. D 40 

Rev. Cornelius Woelfkin, D. D 44 

Prof. WiHiston Walker, v. D 45 

Bishop Ethelhert Talbot, I). D 47 

BishoT) John n. Hamilton, D. I) 51 

Rev. Rufus W. Tiller, D. D 57 

Rev. R. Z. Williams, K D 60 

Rev. J. U. Schneider 63 

Rev. George Uf., Richards, D m D 65 

Rev. William A. Fneemantle. 71 

Rev. ■ w. is; Runk, D. "D. 75 

Rev . A. c . Thomas 76 

Association for the Promotion of Christian Unity 


(Having its Inception in the Work of Thomas Campbell, a 
Presbyterian Minister of Washington, Pa., 1809) 

An Organization of Disciples of Christ 

PURPOSE OF THE ASSOCIATION: To watch for every indication of 
Christian unity and to hasten the time, by intercessory prayer, friendly 
conferences and distribution of irenic literature, "till we all attain unto 
the unity of the faith.' ' 

Ira ijaVTZQ ev hciv, KaO&g <?{>, 7ra7#j0, kv kfiot /c&yw ev <70i, Iva not 
avTol ev rijiiv ev <Jow % Iva 6 k6g{w^ Ktarevi} 6« cb pe aitecreihaq. 

Ut omnes unum sint, sicut tu Pater in me, et e%o in te, ut et 
ipsi in nobis unum sint, ut credat mundus, quia tu me misisti. 

That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they 
also may be one in us; that the world may belieoe that thou hast sent me. 

with the work of Christian unity, expressed in prayer and cooperation, ir- 
respective of Church affiliation, and the payment of not less than $2.50 for 
annual membership fee, payment preferably in January. Those paying 
less are counted contributors, but not members. 

COMMISSIONERS: Peter Ainslie, D.D., LE.D., President, Baltimore, 
Md.; Carey E. Morgan, M.A., Vice-President, Nashville, Tenn.; H. C. 
Armstrong, M.A., B.D., Secretary, Baltimore, Md. ; E. B. Bagby, M.A., 
B.D., Washington, D. C; F. W. Burnham, EE.D., Cincinnati, Ohio; 
I. S. Chenoweth, M.A., Philadelphia, Pa.; Finis S. Idleman, D.D., 
New York, N. Y.; F. D. Kershner, M.A., EE.D., Cincinnati, Ohio; 
Z. T. Sweeney, EE.D., Columbus, Ind. ; B. A. Abbott, B.A., St. 
Eouis, Mo.; E. M. Bowman, Esq., New York, N. Y.; C. M. Chilton, 
D.D., St. Joseph, Mo.; J. H. Garrison, M.A., EE.D., Claremont, Cal.; 
J. H. Goldner, B.A., Cleveland, Ohio; F. A. Henry M.A., EE-B., Cleve- 
land, Ohio; T. C. Howe, Ph.D., Indianapolis, Ind.; W. P. Eipscomb, 
Esq., Washington, D. C. ; R. A. Eong, Esq., Kansas City, Mo.; C. S. 
Medbury, D.D., Des Moines, la.; C. C. Morrison B.A., Chicago, 111.; 
W. C. Pearce, Esq., Chicago, 111.; A. B. Philputt, D.D., EE-D., Indian- 
apolis, Ind.; E. E. Powell, EE.D., Eouisville, Ky. ; W. F. Richardson, 
M.A., EE.D., Los Angeles, Cal.; I. J. Spencer, M.A., EE-D., Lexing- 
ton, Ky. 

WORK OF THE ASSOCIATION: The Commission of the Association is 
simply the Executive Committee of twenty-five members, nine of whom are 
the Committee on Direction, dealing with such problems as may come be- 
fore the Association for action between the annual meetings. It is pro- 
posed to use this Commission under four divisions: namely, Commission 
on Christian Unity, dealing with Christian unity in general; Commission 
on a World Conference on Faith and Order; Commission on Federation; 
and Commission on International Friendship. To all these subjects the 
Association for the Promotion of Christian Unity has spoken. The Asso- 
ciation publishes The Christian Union Quarterly. 

For further particulars, address 

Association for the Promotion of Christian Unity 

Peter Ainslie, President 
Seminary House, Baltimore, Md., U. S. A. 

Bibliography of Christian Unity 

THE BOOKS included in this list are by Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Roman 
Catholics, Congregationalists, Unitarians, Lutherans, Baptists, Disciples of Christ, etc. 

CHRISTIAN UNION, Van Dyke, Appleton, 1885 $1.00 

CHRISTIAN UNION, Garrison, St Louis, Christian Board of Publication, 

1906 , 1.00 

CHRISTIAN UNION IN EFFORT, Firth, Philadelphia, Lippincott, 1911.. 1.S0 

Co., 1913 2/6 

CHRISTIAN UNITY, Briggs, Scribner, 1900 1.00 

CHRISTIAN UNITY AT WORK, Macfarland, Federal Council 1.00 

CHURCH DIVISIONS AND CHRISTIANITY, Grane, Macmillan, 1916.... 2.00 


Young, Chicago, The Christian Century Co., 1904 1.00 

HOW TO PROMOTE CHRISTIAN UNION, Kershner, Cincinnati, The 

Standard Publishing Co., 1916 1.00 

LECTURES ON THE REUNION OF THE CHURCH, Dollinger, Dodd, 1872 1.50 

land. 5 Vols 5.00 


Christian Century Co , .50 


Scribner, 1908 1.00 


RELIGIOUS SYSTEMS OF THE WORLD, London, Swan Sonnenschein & 

Co., 1908 

RESTATEMENT AND REUNION, Streeter, Macmillan, 1914 75 


1895 1.25 

DOM, Tarner, London, Elliott Stock, 1895 

THAT THEY ALL MAY BE ONE, Wells, Funk & Wagnalls Co., 1905 75 

THAT THEY ALL MAY BE ONE, Whyte, Armstrong, 1907 25 

THE CHRISTIAN SYSTEM, Campbell, St. Louis, Christian Board of Pub- 
lication, 1890 1.00 

THE CHURCH AND RELIGIOUS UNITY, Kelly, Longmans, 1913 1.50 

THE CHURCHES OF THE FEDERAL COUNCIL, Macfarland, Revell.... 1.00 

THE LARGER CHURCH, Lanier, Fredericksburg, Va 1.25 

THE LEVEL PLAN FOR CHURCH UNION, Brown, Whittaker, 1910 1.50 

THE MEANING OF CHRISTIAN UNITY, Cobb, Crowell, 1915 1.25 


CHURCH, Ainslie, Revell, 1913 1.00 

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF RELIGIOUS SECTS, McComas, Revell, 1912.... 1.25 

mans, 1911 75 

delphia. American Sunday-School Union, 1915 75 


1895 , 2.50 


Harnack, Macmillan, 1899 1.00 

UNITY AND MISSIONS, Brown, Revell, 1915 1.50 

WHAT MUST THE CHURCH DO TO BE SAVED? Simms, Revell, 1913.. 1.50 


A World Conference on Faith and Order, time and place not 
yet named. 

At the instance of the Association for the Promotion of 
Christian Unity, Pentecost Sunday has been named primarily as 
the day for special sermons on Christian unity in all Churches, 
along with prayers to that end. 


Alfred E. Garvie 

is one of the foremost British scholars. He was born in Poland, edu- 
cated in Edinburgh, Glasgow and Oxford universities. From 1903-7 
he was professor of philosophy of theism, comparative religion and 
Christian ethics in Hackney College a nd New College, London. Since 
1907 he has been the principal of the latter institution. He is the 
author of numerous books. Among them are: Studies m the Inner Lif. 
of Jesus, My Brother's Keeper, etc. 

Francis J. Hall 

is the professor of dogmatic theology in the General Theological 
Seminary, New York. He is a member of the Commission of the 
Protestant Episcopal Church on the World Conference on Faith and 
Order and of the commission of that Church on Swedish orders. He 
was the theological counsel for the Church in the trial of Dr. Crapsly 
in 1906. He has written a number of books, some of them being 
Evolution and the Fall, The Incarnation, etc. 

Cyrus J. Kephart 

is a bishop of the United Brethren Church. He has served as presi- 
dent of several colleges in his Church as well as in several prominent 
pastorates. He was elected to the bishopric in 1913 and is the au- 
thor of numerous books, among them, What is a Christian t Chris- 
tianity and the Social Weal, etc. 

J. H. Garrison 

is one of the founders of The Christian-Evangelist, St. Louis, Missouri, 
and is now its Editor Emeritus, having spent his long and fruitful life 
in the advocacy of the unity of the people of God. He is a director 
of the Religious Educational Association. He is the author of more 
than a dozen books, among them are, Christian Union, and Historical 
Study, The Story of a Century, Alone With God, etc. 

John Wakeford 

has been Archdeacon of Stow, England, since 1913. On leaving the 
universities of London and Durham he served churches at Devonport, 
Chichester and Anneld, England, etc. He was lecturer in pastoral 
theology at King's College, London, 1911-12, and is author of The 
Glory of the Cross, etc. 


(Membership in this League is open to all Christians — Greek, Roman, Angli- 
can and Protestant, the only requirement being a notice by post card or let- 
ter of one's desire to be so enrolled, stating the Church of which he is a 
member. Address, Association for the Promotion of Christian Unity, Sem- 
inary House, 504 N. Fulton Ave., Baltimore, Md., U. S. A.) 


When several Communions united in a certain theological college in China, 
the missionaries adopted the plan of teaching to the full classes subjects 
on which the cooperating Churches were agreed and of giving separate pri- 
vate instruction by denominational professors to their own students. When 
this arrangement was announced, the Chinese students objected, stating 
that they wanted to know about all the denominations and that they pre- 
ferred to have each professor explain his position before the whole body of 
students. The professors could not refuse such a request; but they found 
that it was not easy to be aggressively sectarian when they were addressing 
students and colleagues of other Communions. The importance of some de- 
nominational tenets began to shrink before such an audience, and others 
did not appear to be quite so vital as they appeared in a denominational 
class room. A professor in another theological seminary was endeavoring 
to explain to his Chinese class the difference between Arminianism and 
Calvinism. After a laborious effort, he said to them: "Young gentlemen, 
do you clearly get the fundamental difference between these two great sys- 
tems of theology ?" "Yes, Professor," replied one of the Chinese, "we do 
get it, and we don't think there is much in it. The Arminian is sure that 
he has salvation, but he is afraid he is going to lose it; while the Calvinist 
is sure that he won't lose it, but is afraid he hasn't got it." — Arthur 
Judson Brown 1 , in Unity and Missions. 


O God, we pray for thy Church, which is set to-day amid the perplexities of 
a changing order, and face to face with a great new task. We remember 
with love the nurture she gave to our spiritual life in its infancy, the tasks 
she set for our growing strength, the influence of the devoted hearts she 
gathers, the steadfast power for good she has exerted. When we compare 
her with all other human institutions, we rejoice, for there is none like her. 
But when we judge her by the mind of her Master, we bow in pity and con- 
trition. Oh, baptize her afresh in the life-giving spirit of Jesus! Grant 
her a new birth, though it be with the travail of repentance and humilia- 
tion. Bestow upon her a more imperious responsiveness to duty, a swifter 
compassion with suffering, and an utter loyalty to the will of God. Put up- 
on her lips the ancient gospel of her Lord. Help her to proclaim boldly 
the coming of the Kingdom of God and the doom of all that resist it. Fill 
her with the prophets' scorn of tyranny, and with a Christ-like tenderness 
for the heavy-laden and down-trodden. Give her faith to espouse the cause 
of the people, and in their hands that grope after freedom and light to rec- 
ognize the bleeding hands of the Christ. Bid her cease from seeking her 
own life, lest she lose it. Make her valiant to give up her life to humanity, 
that like her crucified Lord she may mount by the path of the cross to a 
higher glory. — Walter Rauschenbusch, in Prayers of the Social Awaken- 



The influences making to-day for a better understanding 
among the Churches are many, the points of attachment are 
multiplying every year; but the process of the unification of 
Christendom will not progress faster than does the increase 
of love. Denominations, like metals, fuse only when at white 
heat. There is a story of certain bridge-builders who were 
engaged in constructing the two halves of the single arch that 
was to span a river. From either side of the river they labored 
simultaneously, building out from the great piers on opposite 
banks the two arms of the bridge that were to meet in the 
middle. The day came when, at nightfall, the last truss and 
girder were put into place, but to their dismay the plates of 
the bridge were several inches apart and would not meet. But 
the next morning the sun rose above the horizon and, as it 
neared the zenith, poured its warm rays upon all below; and 
the foreman, walking out upon the bridge, found that the 
two great arms of the arch had expanded until they touched 
each other and were easily riveted together. While coldness 
of heart drives us apart, the warmth of Christian love thus 
draws us together. The greatest hindrance to unity is lack 
of the Christ spirit. Selfishness is always divisive. "I didn't 
get that family to come to us, ,; a good woman was heard to 
say, "but one thing is certain, — they will never go to the 
other Church J" Such a spirit would delay the unity of the 
Church until the day of judgment! But when the Churches 
are possessed of the spirit of John the Baptist, when he said 
of his Master, "He must increase, but I must decrease," 
essential Church unity is already achieved. — Kobert A. Ash- 
worth, in The Union of Christian Forces. 


Vol. VIII. JULY, 1918 No. 1 



The preparation for the World Conference on Faith 
and Order is not only revealing the unity that already 
exists in many parts of Christendom, but is affording 
opportunities to make this unity more visible. One of 
the most notable instances of this is the recent state- 
ment, published on another page, of the Second Interim 
Eeport of a subcommittee appointed by the Archbishops 
of Canterbury and York's Cammittee and by represent- 
atives of the English Free Churches' Commissions in 
connection with the proposed "World Conference on 
Faith and Order. In the First Interim Eeport by this 
joint sub-committee the subjects dealt with agreements 
on matters of Faith and Order, as well as a statement of 
differences relating to matters of Order. This second 
Interim Eeport deals with the Episcopate and in such 
fine spirit and unusual fairness, both to the Episcopal 
and non-Episcopal Communions, that whatever may be 
one's opinion, he cannot resist commending the spirit 
and giving himself sympathetically to that atmosphere 
where friendly agreements rise above acrimonious con- 


The appointment of this joint sub-committee was one 
of the results of the visit of the second deputation ap- 
pointed by the Protestant Episcopal Church to visit 
Great Britain and Ireland in 1913-1914 in the interest 
of the proposed World Conference. While no one of the 
signatories is an official spokesman in this matter for 
any of the Communions represented, thereby attempt- 
ing to bind any of the Communions, nevertheless the dis- 
tinguished leadership of the signatories in their respec- 
tive Communions, as well as in British Christianity in 
general, makes this a distinctive historic document, 
which cannot be ignored by any Christian who thinks 
along the paths of reconciliation in the divided Church. 

Just as in their first report they did not attempt to 
draw up a creed because they formulated certain definite 
agreements of Faith, so in this instance they disclaim 
any intention of formulating any basis for the reunion 
of Christendom; but, as explorers, they are seeking to 
make such preparation for the consideration of a basis 
as must receive consideration in the proposed Confer- 

The report sets aside matters relating to the origin, 
history and authority of the Episcopate, and seeks to 
maintain only the fact "not as a basis for immediate ac- 
tion, but for the sympathetic and generous consideration 
of all the Churches. ' ? Then, speaking for both the Epis- 
copal and non-Episcopal divisions, it says : 

' ' The first fact which we agree to acknowledge is that 
the position of Episcopacy in the greater part of Chris- 
tendom, as the recognized organ of the unity and con- 
tinuity of the Church, is such that the members of the 
Episcopal Churches ought not to be expected to abandon 
it in assenting to any basis of reunion. 

"The second fact which Ave agree to acknowledge is 
that there are a number of Christian Churches not ac- 
cepting the Episcopal order which have been used by 
the Holy Spirit in His work of enlightening the world, 
converting sinners, and perfecting saints. They came 


into being through reaction from grave abuses in the 
Church at the time of their origin, and were led in re- 
sponse to fresh apprehensions of divine truth to give ex- 
pression to certain types of Christian experience, aspira- 
tion and fellowship, and to secure rights of the Christian 
people which had been neglected or denied.' ' 

This is well said, but the question arises, Is the Epis- 
copate the organ of the unity and continuity of the 

Eegarding its unity, as a matter of fact the Episco- 
pate is not the organ of unity. There are no wider divis- 
ions in Christendom to-day than between the three great 
divisions among the Episcopal Churches — Greek Ortho- 
dox, Eoman Catholic and Anglican. There is a far 
greater likelihood of the organic unity of all Protestant- 
ism than of these three branches of the Episcopacy. 

Eegarding its continuity, this has been one of the 
streams of continuity which, in an historic document 
signed some years ago by a group of Episcopalians and 
Disciples in New York, it was recognized "that from 
very early times' ' there was a common succession of or- 
ders. The second specification is more tangible, however, 
than the first, but we are not quibbling over words and 
phrases. We rejoice over every indication of progress 
toAvard reconciliation. 

The second fact is likewise a decided advance. Be- 
cause Protestantism reacted from Eoman Catholicism 
and Non-conformity dissented from the Establishment is 
no reason that they were any less Churches than the 
Churches from which came the reaction and dissent were 
any less Churches because of their abuses. Said one of 
the Prime Ministers of England in the midst of a dis- 
cussion on international relations, ' ' Gentlemen, we must 
study larger maps." It is no less pertinent in our dis- 
cussion of problems bearing on Christian unity. The 
Greek, Eoman, Anglican and Protestant, irrespective of 
their theories regarding the priesthood, are the great di- 


visions of Christendom. They are all Churches, but 
Churches divided. They have all had their abuses, which 
should serve as lessons to cause us to avoid like abuses 
in the future. They have all had their illustrious his- 
tories and these histories will never be disowned as long 
as memory holds in its embrace our heroic forebears, 
whose faith and devotion were channels through which 
divine life flowed from generation to generation, 
whether amid elaborate ritual with smoking incense or 
amid the plainer worship of singing hymns and witness- 
ing one to another of that heavenly grace that makes 
men free. All of these have their offerings to make for 
a united Christendom, for a permanent unity cannot 
come by compromise or elimination, but instead it must 
come by comprehension and all of the accumulations of 
faith, freedom, brotherly kindness and love that each 
possesses. The united Church cannot afford to lose any- 
thing in the past that has given enrichment to human 
life, whether its custodians be Greek, Eoman, Anglican 
or Protestant. 

It is not a question of whether Protestants shall be 
converts to Episcopacy, as the London Church Times 
intimates, or whether the walls of the Episcopate are 
crumbling by incorporating the term " constitutional,' ' 
but it is sufficient that the signatories of this report ad- 
vise that the Episcopate assume "a constitutional form, 
both as regards the method of election of the bishops as 
by clergy and people, and the method of government 
after election, " which is the practise of the Protestant 
Episcopal Church in America. This is significant es- 
pecially in England, both because of the exploratory 
character of the statement as adapted to these times 
and the tendency to return to the primitive ideals and 
practises of the Episcopacy. We must find our way out 
of where we are with our multiplicity of divisions to 
both an atmosphere and basis that will indicate the pos- 
sibilities of unity for the whole Church. Under the 


leadership of Christ these adjustments are altogether 
possible, for back to him and around him toleration, 
courtesy and brotherly kindness prevail. One man di- 
recting with infallibility what others shall do is tyr- 
anny; every man doing that which is right in his own 
eyes is anarchy. There is a middle ground somewhere 
and that middle ground is right or else we destroy 
thousands of human possibilities in the finest art of 
which we dream. 

There must be organization. It is a part of life. Said 
John Euskin, "The highest and first law of the universe, 
and the other name of life, is help. The other name of 
death is separation. Government and cooperation are 
in all things, and eternally, the laAvs of life. Anarchy 
and competition, eternally, and in all things the laws of 
death." The days of monarchal governments in state 
affairs are shortened. Political democracies are wid- 
ening the channels of human activities. The Church, 
sad to say, but always the last to give away for these 
widening currents, must gradually give away, and the 
report of this sub-committee is one of the indications. 
It will hardly come as a revolution. The human mind 
is better prepared for changes in this day than it was in 
either the sixteenth or seventeenth centurv, when Prot- 
estantism and Non-conformity swept their way like for- 
est fires. Adjustments of the future will come gradu- 
ally ; a more comprehensive organization will find itself ; 
orderliness will seek adjustment to the needs of the 
times; and the whole Church shall bring its wealth of 
holiness to a common altar. The time is already at 


By Alfred E. Garvie, M.A., D.D., Principal of New College. London, Eng. 


(1) That the Church in the New Testament was one 
Church needs no proof. That unity was at a very early 
date threatened by the grievance of the Hellenists 
against the Hebrews in the Church of Jerusalem, and 
still more seriously imperiled by the dispute regarding 
the circumcision of the Gentiles who believed. Paul, in 
insisting on going to Jerusalem with the gifts of the 
Gentiles, was ready to be offered up as a sacrifice on the 
altar of the Church's unity. Not only was there this 
peril of schism, but the Epistles of the Captivity show 
heresy threatened even at a very early date. The apos- 
tolic unity was not uniformity; we must distinguish va- 
rious types in the theology of the New Testament. If 
Paul and James do not contradict one another on the 
subject of the relation of faith and works, it is certain 
that the emphasis of one falls differently from that of 
the other. The author of II. Peter speaks respectfully of 
"our beloved brother Paul," but is evidently uneasy 
about the results of his teaching in some cases. A sub- 
stantial unity there is, but no absolute uniformity. It 
had been a good thing for the Church had that fact been 
fully recognized, and its consequences consistently ac- 

(2) Can we truly claim that subsequently to the apos- 
tolic age there ever was a time when uniformity held 
sway? Must we not honestly admit that the attempts to 
enforce uniformity only produced division? We must 
condemn as not Christian all the schisms and heresies 



that the dominant party in the Church succeeded in sup- 
pressing or expelling, if we are to make the assumption 
that there was in the strict sense of the word catholic a 
Catholic Church. Not to put in a plea even for Arians 
or Macedonians, must we banish Nestorians and Mon- 
ophysites beyond the Christian pale? If they are not, 
was the Church that persecuted them catholic® The di- 
vision of East and West surely imperils this claim to 
catholicity for each of these sections. If in what was 
common to them lay the roots of their subsequent divi- 
sions, can we claim that that common element has the 
indelible character of catholicity? Can we arbitrarily 
fix a date in the history of the Christian Church, and 
assert that only what emerged before that date has a 
right to be regarded as catholic! Not only may what 
has emerged in history be submerged by history, but 
surely after that date much may have emerged not de- 
serving submergence. Without an arbitrary handling 
of history we cannot in the strict sense of the word af- 
firm catholicity of belief, worship or polity, spatially or 

(3) Are we not even driven to the conclusion that the 
unity of the Christian Church might have been pre- 
served to a far greater extent, had not uniformity been 
made the end, and had not means been used to secure 
that end which only served to provoke divisions 9 In not 
a few cases the sin of schism or heresy is to be looked 
for rather in the arrogance of the majority than in the re- 
calcitrance of the minority. If we to-day for convenience 
accept the epithet Catholic for a certain type of doctrine, 
ritual, polity which has dominated the greater part of 
Christendom through the larger period of Christian his* 
tory, it must be understood that we do not concede the 
assumption of the word that this type can claim to be, 
or has even proved to be, universally and permanently 
the only valid expression of Christian faith and life. 


(4) The denial of catholicity in this sense of the 
word does not mean, however, that there has been no 
unity of the Christian Church in the past, and that we 
may not dare to hope for even a greater measure of 
unity in the future. All that is affirmed is that Catholi- 
cism has sought the wrong kind of unity, and has sought 
it by means that provoked, and could only provoke, di- 
vision. That is surely one of the most important les- 
sons which history could teach us. Nor does this denial 
mean that the Catholic Church, that is, the Church which 
has claimed to be catholic, was generally wrong, and the 
schismatics and heretics generally right, and that conse- 
quently we are not to look to Catholicism for any valu- 
able contribution to the Catholic Church of the future. 
The Keformers would rise in judgment against us if 
we made any such suggestion. They accepted what were 
recognized as the catholic creeds. We may gratefully 
acknowledge a Divine providence in the history of the 
Christian Church, and may affirm that Athanasius was 
right against Arius, the Chalcedonian creed against Eu- 
tychianism and Nestorianism, although we may not be 
prepared to accept either the creed of Nicsea or Chalce- 
don as the last word that can be spoken on the person of 
our Lord. Challenging exclusive validity, we do not 
deny supreme value to much in Catholicism. 

(5) If we cannot accept the sufficiency of Catholicism 
still less can we make any so arrogant claim for Protes- 
tantism. Controversy, if it sometimes sifts out the truth 
from the error, often exaggerates one aspect of truth to 
the neglect of others, and this Protestantism in antago- 
nism to Catholicism has often done. If we are to recover 
unity we must seek it in the way of conciliation and not 
compromise. Of this method of synthesis instead of 
antithesis one illustration may here be offered in refer- 
ence to a subject — baptism — of special interest to many 
of the readers of The Christian Union Quarterly. 



(1) We must first of all dissever the practise of in- 
fant baptism from the doctrine of baptismal regenera- 
tion. "While we may reject the one, and the evangelical 
Protestant Christian mnst reject the one, we may retain 
the other. We may hold that the motive of the cnstom 
was better than the reason given for it, and that we can 
find for its continuance a reason more congruous with 
the Gospel. 

(2) If we can remove all superstition from the prac- 
tise, for retaining it there is this to be said. If adher- 
ence to an apostolic practice is a good reason for adult 
baptism, the retention of an ordinance handed down 
through so many generations and invested with so hal- 
lowed associations in the Christian Church can be 
pleaded as a good reason, unless we are going to recog- 
nize a guiding Spirit of God only in the earliest stage of 
the development of the Christian Church. What is re- 
corded in the Scriptures about the command of Christ 
regarding the ordinance is so general that this author- 
ity cannot be invoked as making adult immersion ex- 
clusively right. Assuredly if no valid or valuable sig- 
nificance could be attached to it, we could not preserve, 
even for the sake of continuity, an empty form. What 
is its meaning then? 

(3) Granted that in the apostolic age baptism was ad- 
ministered to adults by immersion, it may be contended 
as regards the mode that the conditions of life to-day 
justify a change which is merely one of outward form, 
and does not destroy the symbolism; and that as re- 
gards the subjects, what obtained in a missionary 
Church among individual converts from an unbelieving 
world need not remain exclusively right in a Church 
which has been long established, and in -which Christian 
influences grow and spread through inheritance, environ- 
ment and education. There are two types of Christian 


experience. In the one conversion marks the begin- 
ning of the Christian life, in the other there is a grad- 
ual development from the earliest years. Adnlt baptism 
is the seal of the one, infant baptism the promise of the 
other. If confession of personal faith is the human side 
of the one, dedication of the child to personal faith by 
the parents and the Church is the human side of the 
other. In both cases the Divine grace is present, as 
grace already efficient in the one case ; as grace pre- 
venient and becoming effective in the teaching and the 
training of the child in the other. The Church, as ante- 
cedent to the individual believer, declares in the one 
case grace available; the individual believer declares in 
the other to the Church grace accepted. The Holy Spirit 
is not only an individual influence, but a corporate power 
in the world through the community of believers; and 
the corporate activity as well as the individual action 
of the Spirit needs to be declared in the sacrament of 
baptism, not only symbolic, but communicative of re- 
deeming grace and renewing power. The reunited 
Church of the future may and ought to include both kinds 
of baptism, as there are two types of Christian experi- 
ence, and thus two aspects of the Spirit's operation. 

(4) Further, what does need emphasis, and in infant 
baptism it is made more prominent than in adult bap- 
tism, is that the initiative in salvation is in God's grace, 
and that man's faith, on which stress is laid in adult 
baptism, is dependent on and responsive to Divine grace. 
God does not wait with his grace till we believe; his 
grace in the Christian community welcomes us that we 
may believe. 

(5) So valid and valuable does infant baptism appear 
to me to be, that I am confident that, not from mere 
traditionalism, but from spiritual discernment the 
Catholic Church must refuse to abandon the practise, 
the abandonment of which could be justified only if the 
Church is in the bondage of the latter to apostolic prac- 


tise, and has not the freedom of the Spirit to make its 
ordinances significant of its living, and growing faith. 
I should no less insist, however, that the abandonment 
of adult baptism could not be required, as that too is 
significant. Each practise declares spiritual reality of 
Divine grace and human faith, and they are not contra- 
dictory, but complementary. Alfred E. Gtarvie. 


By Francis J. Hall, D.D., Professor of Dogmatic Theology in the General 
Theological Seminary, New York. 

When the beloved and large minded editor of this 
Quarterly asked me to write an exposition of that doc- 
trine of priesthood which accounts for the noncommittal 
attitude of many Episcopalians toward official coopera- 
tion between Episcopal and non-Episcopal ministries, I 
felt that he had given me a very delicate task; for the 
priesthood has been the subject-matter of much bitter 
controversy — controversy that is still apt to be attended 
by mutual misapprehensions of the strife-engendering v 

Yet the removal of this controversy from the sphere 
of things provocative of discord is really necessary if the 
cause of the world-wide Christian unity for which many 
of us are working and praying is to be effectively pro- 
moted. I know of no other way of hastening such re- 
moval except that which begins with perfectly frank, 
mutual explanations between sacerdotalists and non- 
sacerdotalists, to be followed — not by polemics, but — by 
many loving conferences and by the growth through the 
Spirit of all concerned into larger conceptions of the 
mind of Christ. I have therefore welcomed the oppor- 
tunity to explain the sacerdotal point of view as found 
among Episcopalians as one not to be disregarded, if I 
am to fufill my small part in the mutual-education-cam- 
paign for unity. 

In order to be clearly intelligible I shall approach 
my subject gradually, dealing first with the importance 
of the subject, then with the somewhat diverse types of 
churchmanship, which make the position of Episcopa- 



lians difficult for others to understand, then with our 
official documents so far as ad rem, and finally with 
the so-called High-church conception of priesthood. 


Importance of the Subject 

If Christians are to unite with genuine harmony in 
their religious life and a sacramental communion 
that shall not be a new cause of mutual estrangement, 
they must reach a smoothly working agreement in things 
that determine conscience in matters of religious prac- 
tise and discipline. I do not have in mind any impos- 
sible uniformity of theological opinions, but common 
acceptance of such truths and principles as are thought 
by important groups of Christians to be among the 
things which must be maintained in the Church if the 
will of Christ is to be carried out in practise. To give 
an instance, believers in our Lord's divine claim could 
not conscientiously acquiesce in the sanction of Unita- 
rian doctrine within the Church because they would feel 
that such sanction would embarrass the faithful at large 
in rendering the allegiance due to Christ. 

Now sacerdotalists believe that the cleavage of con- 
victions concerning priesthood, so unhappily evident in 
Christendom to-day, draws with it differences in practise 
which are too sharply apparent, too closely connected 
with corporate relations in the Body of Christ, and too 
directly significant as to how we shall obey Christ in 
religious practise, to be ignored in working for real 
unity. Promoters of unity who do not face the ques- 
tion of priesthood must either content themselves with a 
unity that will be confined to those who are already suffi- 
ciently agreed on the subject, or suffer disillusionment — 
apt to be followed by discouragement and abandonment 
of the cause. It is true that sacerdotalists and those 
who reckon themselves as non-sacerdotalists get on to- 


gether — not without occasional controversial bitterness 
— in the Episcopal Church. But this is partly because 
they inherit in common one unitive working system, the 
traditional influence of which is not easily resisted ; and 
partly because there is really a deeper agreement, even 
as to priesthood, than the controversies between "high" 
and "low" churchmen over certain aspects of the subject 
permit to appear. At least all sections of Episcopalians 
loyally use a ministry of sacerdotal lineage and name. 
Obviously before sacerdotal and anti-sacerdotal Com- 
munions can be united in harmonious religious practise 
and in interior fellowship, such a disturbing question as 
priesthood must come to settlement. This means that 
our labors for unity must include a real facing of the 
subject by loving, prayerful and frank interchange of 
explanations and considerations. Explanations are ob- 
viously required, for, unless my experience is wholly at 
fault, there is much inveterate misunderstanding be- 
tween sacerdotalists and anti-sacerdotalists. Yet I con- 
fidently believe that if we go about the business rightly,, 
misunderstandings will die out in time, the determina- 
tive data will clearly emerge, and truth will prevail. 
Where truth prevails one mind rules. The process will 
try our patience with its slowness, no doubt, but the 
achievement of world-wide Christian unity is too great 
for any short-cut. 


Diverse Types of Opinion. 

Non-Episcopal observers are often puzzled by seem- 
ingly contradictory aspects of Episcopalianism. It ap- 
pears to combine elements both of rigid traditionalism 
and of modern liberalism, each contending for mastery, 
but both holding together in a unity not elsewhere ex- 
hibited under such seemingly divisive conditions. De- 
scribing the situation more analytically, but in the 
rough, "high" churchmen emphasize the ecclesiastical^ 


sacerdotal and sacramental aspects of Church teaching 
and practise; "low" churchmen dwell on the "evangel- 
ical" aspects and on personal religion; and "broad" 
churchmen concern themselves with the liberal, progres- 
sive and humanitarian side of things, But all three 
classes, in their several ways, adhere with sincere loy- 
alty — exceptions are very few — to one rather full and 
significant working system. 

The explanation of this unity amidst diversity lies, I 
think, in the concurrent working in the Episcopal and 
Anglican system of three principles — continuity, con- 
formity and liberty. 

(a) Continuity. The appeal to antiquity has been a 
determinative factor in Anglican developments. It was 
the basis of rejection in the sixteenth century of papal 
claims and of mediaeval accretions and corruptions. But 
it also explains the Anglican refusal at that time to 
alter the threefold ministry and the requirement of 
episcopal ordination, to abandon liturgical worship and 
to make other changes then being pressed. Continuity 
with the ancient Catholic Church was felt to be vital; 
and this feeling, although felt in varying degree, has 
never ceased to exercise a conservative and restraining 
influence on Anglicans and Episcopalians in general. 

(b) External conformity, originally enforced on 
grounds partly political, and by methods which chal- 
lenged opposition and organized non-conformity, has 
remained as a unifying factor since the unspiritual 
methods of compulsion have been abandoned. It is still 
a vital factor in this Communion. Individual consciences 
are no longer overruled, but the spiritual privileges of 
the Church are still reserved for those who can sincerely 
conform to her working system and prescribed ritual. 
The emphasis now is upon willing and sincere con- 
formity ; and both our theory and our experience teaches 
us that those who thus conform to a working system so 
coherent and significant of vital principles as ours seems 


to us to be are not likely to go far astray from the 
essential elements of truth and practise which are em- 
bodied in that system. A working system based upon 
and patently witnessing to a traditional faith is likely to 
foster substantial loyalty to that faith on the part of 
those who willingly conform. Ceremonial adjuncts vary 
considerably in our parishes, but what the Prayer Booh 
requires to be said and done is generally observed. 

(c) The principle of mental and spiritual liberty has 
also played effective part since the abandonment of the 
mistaken coercive policy of the post-Keformation period. 
Sincerity of personal convictions is expected of all, and 
if the results in given cases preclude loyal conformity, 
no anathemas or other invidious measures prevent the 
individuals concerned from embracing non-conformity. 
The only limits of freedom are such as are required to 
protect the Church's own working system and propa- 
ganda from subversion. If a minister, for instance, who 
holds office for the purpose of teaching Church doctrine 
and under solemn pledge that he will do so, turns about 
and publicly assails the Church's teachings in matters 
admittedly fundamental, he is likely to be tried before 
his peers and deprived of his office. But such trials 
are rare, and are not deemed justifiable except when the 
Church's propaganda is obviously endangered by in- 

In working this policy takes the nerve out of disturb- 
ing movements, which may seem formidable for the mo- 
ment, but ' ' have their day and pass away. ' ' The internal 
unity of this Church is not easy to break, for the motive 
of schism is without adequate basis. 

Our working system as embodied in The Book of 
Common Prayer is sufficiently definitive concerning what 
we deem to be essential doctrine and practise. But it 
leaves room for considerable diversity of emphasis upon 


its several elements, and for a wide variety of opinion 
concerning many theological questions. Diverse opinions 
gain utterance, of course, and it is important to note 
that the more startling and unrepresentative of general 
sentiment in the Episcopal Church they are, the more 
likely they are to gain public attention and be taken 
note of by non-Episcopalians. What I am leading up to 
is that the real episcopal mind is not to be discovered 
in the utterances that are apt to be regarded as repre- 
sentative by outsiders. Back of these exploitings is a 
solid unity of mind within the Church which needs more 
searching inquiry to ascertain. And the official teach- 
ing of the Prayer Booh retains its hold on the bulk of 
Episcopalians amid all the disturbances of passing move- 
ments and demonstrations. 

, In the matter of priesthood, for example, amid dif- 
ferences of accent, "high," "low" and "broad" church- 
men alike conform to a working system in which priest- 
hood is an integral element. Their divergence, if a few 
unrepresentative extremists in each group are eliminated, 
is confined to the choice of different aspects of this priest- 
hood for more or less exclusive emphasis. High-church- 
men, with varying degree of stress, emphasize the 
identity of the priestly order with that which existed in 
the Catholic Church prior to the Eeformation, and the 
supernatural and corporate aspects of its functioning. 
Low or Evangelical-churchmen emphasize the priest- 
hood of the laity and freedom of personal access to God. 
Broad-churchmen emphasize the adaptation of the priest- 
hood to modern conditions and emancipation from what 
they deem to be outworn shibboleths. But the united and 
willing adherence of all these types of churchmen to one 
working system, and their common use of the ministry 
of "priests," prevents their divergence from having the 
disruptive significance which it otherwise might have. 



Official Doctrine. 

The official mind of the Episcopal Church is expressed 
in The Book of Common Prayer, either by direct defini- 
tion and prescription or by indirect implication in what 
is therein required to he said and done in public worship 
and other official ministrations. It is pretty generally 
recognized among us that lex orandi lex credendi, the 
law of worship is the law of belief. That is, prescribed 
forms and terms in worship imply that our faith should 
be in harmony with the use of such forms and terms. 
The regular use of the Prayer Booh by our people, both 
clerical and lay, gives its teaching a vital influence, which 
is often wanting to confessional documents not so re- 
peatedly and effectively brought to the attention of the 

Now the Prayer Booh is not a manual of exact and 
exclusive definitions — although sufficiently clear as to 
central doctrines — so much as a practical guide for 
churchmen, embodying with varying explicitness the sev- 
eral truths and principles upon which the Episcopal 
working system is based. So it is that, while the broad 
lines of ecclesiastical doctrine are exhibited with suffi- 
cient clearness, considerable room remains for varying 
theological developments. 

What, then, does the Prayer Booh say and require 
with regard to priesthood? In the first place every min- 
ister who is advanced beyond the grade of deacons is 
ostensibly ordained a "priest," the formula being, "Be- 
ceive the Holy Ghost for the Office and Work of a Priest 
in the Church of Grod, now committed unto thee by the im- 
position of our hands," etc. 

Moreover, the name ' < priest ' ' is obviously used in the 
Prayer Booh at large in a sacerdotal sense. Thus, when- 
ever something is ordered to be said or done which pre- 


Eeformation usage restricted to sacer dotes, such as 
pronouncing absolution and celebrating the Holy Com- 
munion or Liturgy, the officiant is designated " priest,' ' 
whereas in all non-sacerdotal functions, such as deacons 
can perform, he is called "minister." In the " Office of 
Institution of Ministers into Parishes or Churches" the 
instituted "Presbyter" is declared to be "possessed of 
full power to perform every Act of sacerdotal Func- 
tion" in the parish. The meaning of sacerdotal func- 
tions is nowhere formally denned, but is to be inferred 
from the things which the Prayer Booh requires to be 
done by a "priest." As has already been indicated, 
these are chiefly celebrating the Liturgy and pro- 
nouncing absolution. The bishop can always act, of 
course, for he does not lose his priesthood through 
episcopal consecration. In ordaining priests the bishop 
says to the ordained, according to the first of two alter- 
native forms, "Whose sins thou dost forgive, they are 
forgiven ; and whose sins thou dost retain, they are re- 
tained. ' ' In the form of absolution contained in ' i Order 
for Daily Morning Prayer" and in that for "Daily Eve- 
ning Prayer," it is affirmed that Grod "hath given power 
and commandment to his Ministers to declare and pro- 
nounce to his people, being penitent, the Absolution and 
Eemission of their sins." 

The importance of preserving the order of priests 
from alteration is borne witness to in the Preface of the 
Ordinal. Here, after asserting that the ministry of 
bishops, priests and deacons has existed in Christ's 
Church "from the Apostles' time," the Church says r 
"And therefore to the intent that these Orders may 
be continued, and reverently used and esteemed in this 
Church, no man shall be accounted or taken to be a law- 
ful Bishop, Priest or Deacon, in this Church, or suffered 
to execute any of the said Functions except he be . . . 
admitted thereunto, according to the Form hereafter 
following, or hath had Episcopal Consecration or Ordina- 


tion." In the Declaration on Unity of 1886, our bishops 
accentuated this requirement of Episcopal transmission 
of authority to execute priestly functions by including 
"The Historic Episcopate" as one of the "inherent 
parts" of "the substantial deposit of Christian Faith 
and Order committed by Christ and His Apostles to the 
Church unto the end of the world, and therefore inca- 
pable of compromise or surrender by those who have 
been ordained to be its stewards and trustees for the 
common and equal benefit of all men. ' ' The doctrine that 
the Orders of the Ministry are of divine appointment 
also emerges in the opening clause of the collect ap- 
pointed to be used in Ordering priests. "Almighty God, 
... Who by Thy Holy Spirit hast appointed divers 
Orders of Ministers in the Church." 

To recapitulate, this Church teaches officially that 
that order of priests which has existed in the Church 
from the ancient days should be preserved as a sacred 
trust received from Christ and His apostles, and that 
none should be admitted to it except by episcopal ordi- 
nation. The functions of this priesthood are delimited 
from those of the diaconate on the same general lines as 
were observed in the ancient and medieval Church. 
They are described as sacerdotal, and are made in prac- 
tise chiefly to include pronouncing absolution and cele- 
brating the Holy Communion. 


Sacerdotal Theology. 

My readers can perceive that, if my quotations from 
the Prayer Book are properly selected, they plainly 
teach some sort of priesthood, but not in terms which 
are sufficiently exclusive as to shut out a certain amount 
of variation in their theological interpretation — varia- 
tion which has already been described in general terms, 
and which in Low-church circles takes the form of repu- 


diation of ' ' sacerdotalism, ' ' although accompanied by- 
loyal conformity to a system which involves use of an 
order of "priests." It is by High-churchmen that the 
doctrine of priesthood is given full theological treatment, 
and it is this theology which I shall now summarize. 

To begin with, High-churchmen accept the positives 
on this subject of Low and Broad-churchmen. With the 
former they believe in lay priesthood, and with the 
latter they recognize the necessity of adapting priest- 
hood to the conditions of each successive age. Their 
characteristic emphasis, however, is placed upon the 
distinctive functions of priesthood, upon their super- 
natural quality, and upon the official and corporate 
aspects of ministerial as distinguished from lay priest- 
hood. They also make much of the catholic inheritance of 
the Episcopal Church, believing that this Church intends 
no other change from pre-Reformation principles than 
she explicitly sets forth in the Prayer Booh. In brief, 
they hold that the Church intends no breach of continuity 
with the past, but retains as a matter of course every 
integral element of ancient catholic doctrine and prac- 
tise. Accordingly they interpret the Prayer Booh lan- 
guage concerning priesthood as substantially identical 
in meaning with the catholic doctrine of antiquity. And 
they consider this interpretation to be supported by 
sufficient evidence contained in official documents of the 
Anglican reformation. 

(a) From this standpoint they maintain that Christ 
gave to the Church a share on earth not only in His 
prophetic and kingly office but also in His priesthood. 
He gave this to the whole Church, and every baptized 
member of the Church inherits a share in the gift. The 
laity then as truly have part in the "royal priesthood" 
of which St. Peter speaks as do official ministers. 

(b) But they hold that this priesthood is corporate. 
It was not bestowed upon a mere collection of individual 
believers, but upon a society then being organized around 


the apostolic nucleus. This society was not, properly 
speaking, a volunteer association, but the Lord's own 
creation. It was to be endowed with the Holy Spirit, and 
thus to be brought into those vital, corporate and struc- 
tural relations to its Creator which we symbolize when, 
after the example of St. Paul, we call the Church the 
Body of Christ. Whatever we are in Christ we are as 
in His mystical Body, the Church — the relation being 
social, corporate and subject to organic differentiation. 
All the members of the Body share in its priestly func- 
tioning, but each member in a manner determined by his 
place in the Body. "Not all have the same office" in the 
common priesthood. 

(c) The difference between lay priesthood and that 
of priests in the more technical sense, is between min- 
isterial or official, and unofficial. A ministerial priest 
acts representatively for the whole mystical Body of 
Christ — not as a substitute, nor externally, but as an 
organ in corporate functioning of the whole Church. 
The priest is one of the faithful, distinguishable from the 
rest only by organic relations in the common function- 
ing of the Body. He acts among, as well as for, the 
rest. They "assist" and use him, because along with 
him they constitute the Body which functions corporately 
by his ministry. Therefore he does not come between 
them and God, whether we consider them collectively or 
as individuals. All act together in matters of corporate 
functioning, although each acts in his own way accord- 
ing to his place in the whole mystical Body. 

(d) The functions ascribed to priesthood are two- 
fold, having to do with the bestowal of gifts from God 
to the members of Christ's Body and with their cor- 
porate approach to God. I have described these func- 
tions as corporate. The members of Christ are mem- 
bers one of another, even in their deepest relations to 
God. These relations are not exclusively corporate, and 
what is called personal religion is a very real and precious 


thing. But the personal is dependent upon the social 
and corporate. We are by nature social and mutually 
dependent beings. So it is that, in our conception of 
things, God wills to bestow His grace in and through 
Christ, but through Him as Head of a mystical Body, 
the members of which are to be nourished and blessed 
in their corporate relationship. 

This determines the external organization of the 
Church, through which the manner of Christ 's mediation 
is visibly corporate and ministerial. And this corporate 
method holds in our approach to the Father; and our 
mutual relations in the Body of Christ control the man- 
ner in which we employ His mediation, a manner neces- 
sarily ministerial. 

Our Liturgy embodies both of these aspects of priest- 
hood. In it, on the one hand, the Church lays hold upon 
the spiritual nourishment of Christ's Body and Blood, 
received from Him, and distributes the gift through her 
ministers to the faithful. In it also, on the other hand, 
she makes a solemn approach to God, with a memorial of 
Christ's death — an oblation in which all identify them- 
selves with the great sacrifice of Calvary and plead its 
merits. It is a corporate action; and is therefore ful- 
filled liturgically, and in a manner believed to have been 
appointed by Christ Himself. 

(e) The earthly priest is a minister of Christ, serv- 
ing in His presthood, and employed by Him in conde- 
scension to those human limitations which our natural 
and social dependence upon each other's ministry im- 
poses. We believe that we can gain effective help, and 
can adequately express our relations to God in worship, 
only in a manner agreeing with our mutual dependence 
in every ramification of receptivity and expression. 

(f) We hold that the manner of priestly function- 
ing is determined — not by human arrangements nor on 
lines that can be essentially changed, but — by the struc- 
tural nature of the Body of Christ, which comes from 


Him. No other body on earth can function in priesthood 
except the Body of Christ, and it can function ionly 
through the organism and ministry which Christ has 
given to it. Speaking in historical terms, this means to 
us that the ministerial structure of Christ's Body on 
earth is represented by the three sacred orders of 
bishops, priests and deacons, as perpetuated by an un- 
broken continuity of episcopal consecration or ordina- 
tion. This is not belief in a caste, but in an organism. 
The priesthood draws its members from the faithful at 
large, regardless of any undemocratic distinctions. The 
family affords a partial analogy. It also is of divine 
ordering and organic. To call it undemocratic is to use 
a non-relevant description, and to us it is no more diffi- 
cult to reconcile a sacerdotal ministry with democratic 
ideals than it is to do the same for the sacred institution 
of parents. We conceive both institutions to be divine 
and both to leave the equality of souls before God en- 
tirely unaffected. 

In Relation to Non-Episcopal Ministries, 

As might be expected in view of the working system 
of the Episcopal Church, and the official language quoted 
in the third section of this article, the high Church con- 
ception of priesthood is strongly intrenched in this 
Church. There are indeed varieties of opinion on the 
subject even among High-churchmen — "moderate" and 
"advanced;" but it is safe to say that a majority of 
Episcopalians are sufficiently imbued with belief that 
the priestly order is charged with corporate functions 
that may not be given to others, and that its preservation 
is vital, for them to feel grave alarm at any proposal 
either to coordinate non-Episcopal ministers with our 
"priests" in religious functioning or to ordain men to 
the priesthood with the open understanding that they 
shall not be required to accept its distinctive claim. 


Does this mean that Episcopalians regard non-Episco- 
pal ministries as invalid? Thorny as the question is it 
demands a straightforward reply; but the facts do not 
permit a simple one. The answer has to be both i i Yes ' ' 
and "No." Yes, if we take these ministries at their own 
apparent valuation, for we cannot regard them as valid 
for the performance of functions which they disclaim, 
and non-Episcopal ministries do repudiate sacerdotal 
claims — both for themselves and for every earthly min- 
istry. Accordingly we may not, consistently with our 
principles, accept non-Episcopal ministries as substitutes 
for the historic priesthood. 

But there is another sense in which w T e answer the 
question with an emphatic "No." We acknowledge 
willingly and gladly that the Holy Spirit does not con- 
fine His operations to the dispensation of things which 
we believe Christ to have appointed, but blesses the. work 
of every ministry which represents sincere purpose of 
serving Christ and of obeying His will. In particular f 
we clearly recognize the indisputable evidences of bless- 
ing given to the work of Protestant ministers in many 
lands. We do so not less certainly because we think that 
precious advantages are lost through departure from 
what we believe to be the divine arrangements for the 
Church of Christ. In this connection we are thankful 
that this Church has refused to make negative pro- 
nouncements, and has confined itself to the positive task 
of guarding carefully the continuity and integrity of its 
priestly ministry. 

Francis J. Hall. 


By Cyrus J. Kephart, D.D., Bishop of the Church of the United Brethren 

in Christ, Kansas City, Mo. 

If there is divine authority for a united Christendom, 
it must be found in the Word of God. 

If a united Christendom is desirable, it must be pri- 
marily in order to comply with the Word of God. 

If a united Christendom is practicable, it must be 
upon a plan in harmony with the Word of God. 

These propositions are stated with the conviction that 
they are legitimate conclusions from the fundamental 
predication that Christianity is of divine origin and pur- 
pose, and that the Bible is its fundamental documentary 

Our Lord in His great intercessory prayer following 
the last supper uttered a petition that clearly expresses 
His will, and therefore the divine authority in this rela- 
tion : ' 6 Holy Father, keep them in Thy name which thou 
hast given Me, that they may be one, even as We are. 

. . Neither for these only do I pray, but for them 
also that believe on Me through their word; that they 
may all be one, even as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I 
in Thee, that they also may be in Us : that the world may 
believe that Thou didst send Me. ' ' 

The terms in this petition are simple and forcible; 
yet they are general to such a degree that they raise the 
inquiry, Does Jesus pray simply that His followers may 
be one in spirit and purpose! or does He in this petition 
embrace the further idea, that they may be one in organic 
form, to the end that they may be one in effort? 

Whether justifiedly or not, Protestantism largely has 
interpreted our Lord as praying only for unity in spirit 



and purpose, and in this interpretation has claimed jus- 
tification for her wide diversity in organization; but 
sadly true is it that Protestantism has been greatly lack- 
ing in even unity of spirit and purpose. 

The fact that our Lord gave as a reason for His 
prayer for unity * ' that the world may believe that Thou 
didst send Me" seems to indicate that He was thinking 
of more than simple unity in spirit and purpose. He 
prayed for a manifest unity, a unity that will testify to 
the world the fact of His divine mission. If Paul's argu- 
ment in I. Cor. 12 :12-30 may be considered as his com- 
ment upon or exposition of this petition of our Lord, as it 
certainly may be, then it appears that Paul thought of 
the Church as one in more than spirit and purpose ; for, 
"ye (the Church) are the Body of Christ"; "and all the 
members of the Body, being many, are one Body," 
"that there should be no schism in the Body; but that 
the members should have the same care one for an- 
other." As an inspired comment, this can scarcely be 
looked upon as less than a divine call to organic unity 
of the Church. At least this much may be said, that 
there is in this great petition of our Lord all the authority 
needed for a united Christendom. 

This petition is also ample evidence that as far as 
our Lord is concerned, the unity for which He prayed 
is desirable; desirable in order that it may help con- 
vince the world that the Father sent Him, and thus help 
toward the realization of the end for which He came — 
the saving of the world from sin and its consequent ruin. 
If desirable then, and in His estimate, it is surely desir- 
able now, with the purpose for which Jesus came less 
than one-half realized. If He prayed for it, then surely 
the Church should now pray for it, that it may be more 
fully adequate to the task before it. 

But is such unity practicable? If Jesus Christ au- 
thorized it, if He desired it, then to Him it was and is 
practicable. And if Christendom will pray for it with 


the same spirit of earnestness, sincerity, and unselfish- 
ness with which Jesus prayed, it will become practicable 
to Christendom. Otherwise, the Church is not justified 
in praying for that for which the Lord Himself prayed 
— an astounding conclusion. 

But, viewing the question from the human side, with 
conditions as they are, is the organic unity of Christen- 
dom practicable! This is a great question. 

Considering Protestantism and Catholicism — Koman 
and Greek — as representing the great divisions of Chris- 
tendom, it may be said without hesitancy that, condi- 
tions being as they are, such union seems impracticable 
for many years to come. As systems of thought and 
practise, they are based on such widely divergent con- 
ceptions, both as to organization and teaching, as to 
render such attainment beyond reach until attitudes and 
conceptions greatly change. 

Considering Protestantism alone, the question of or- 
ganic union is also a great question; this for two rea- 
sons: 1. Not all Protestants, nor all Protestant bodies, 
agree that organic unity has specific divine endorsement, 
nor, hence, that such unity is desirable. 2. Among those 
who consider such unity desirable and divinely author- 
ized, divergent conceptions and practises, in the judg- 
ment of some, render the attaining of such an end im- 
practicable, or at least too great a task to expect to see 

True, many do not so view the situation. At a recent 
meeting of the Clergy Club of New York, as reported by 
The Christian Work, four laymen of four different de- 
nominations, and of marked prominence said, "As far 
as laymen are concerned the day of sectarianism has 
passed* Laymen simply are not interested any longer 
in the things that make denominations. . . . They 
want cooperation among the Churches, but more than 
that they want one Church, the Church of the Living 
God. Christian unity must come and must come quick- 


ly." This sounds as though some think that organic 
unity of Protestantism is not only desirable and practi- 
cable, but that it ought to be accomplished almost over- 
night. But desirable as this end may be, some facts re- 
quire very careful thinking, or precipitate action may 
hinder if not prevent the very end desired. 

It must be remembered that divided Protestantism is 
a development of centuries, having a history of at least 
four hundred years. It is a tree whose roots and 
branches have been a long time growing. Whether this 
development is justifiable or not makes now but little 
difference; it is a fact, and a fact that must be taken 
into consideration very seriously. Not that age gives 
sanctity, but that in connection with this long develop- 
ment conditions have been created which from the very 
nature of the case cannot be quickly changed. 

Speaking broadly as to these resultant conditions, 
there is the fact that each separate body as it has de- 
veloped — and very generally these organizations have 
come as the result of a sincere desire to promote the 
Kingdom, and not of selfish ambition as is so often 
thought — as each separate body has developed it has 
felt under obligation divinely imposed to do its part, to 
do all it can to promote every interest and phase of the 
work of the Kingdom. Hence publishing houses and pub- 
lications, educational institutions, mission, Sunday- 
school, church erection, and other general boards have 
been created and promoted until there has resulted a 
network of corporate organizations interwoven through- 
out the entire body of Protestantism, representing prop- 
erty, financial, and administrative interests widely di- 
vergent in method of operation, and protected under 
widely diverse forms of legal enactment. 

It is easy to say that these conditions should not 
have been brought about, and that to some degree they 
operate to hinder the progress of real Kingdom work. 
But they do exist, and as well the responsibility for their 


existence rests proportionately upon every component 
factor in Protestantism. Now the energy and sacrifice 
represented by these institutions must be saved and cor- 
related for future service ; to dissipate them to any con- 
siderable measure would be little less than criminal. 
The equipment they would furnish when properly 
adjusted for service is beyond estimate. Hence all this 
must be disentangled and adjusted to new forms of pro- 
cedure, if Protestantism is to organize and act as a unit. 

It must be remembered also that in a very important 
sense the present divided condition of Protestantism had 
its origin in a fundamental predication of the Great 
Keformation, a predication as Protestantism verily be- 
lieves that is sanctioned by the Word of God itself, 
namely, the right of private interpretation of the Word 
of God — a right which Protestantism is no more ready 
to yield to-day than it was four hundred years ago. 

Immediately akin to this acknowledged right of pri- 
vate interpretation is another claim of at least many 
Protestants ; that is, the right of believers, in the absence 
from the New Testament of a specified form of ecclesi- 
astical organization and administration, to choose for 
themselves the form of organization and administration 
most in harmony with the teaching and spirit of the New 
Testament, and best adapted to facilitate the attainment 
of the ends for which the Church exists. This fact of the 
absence of any prescribed form, in the judgment of many, 
justifies the conclusion that forms of organization and 
administration are purposely left for intelligent adapta- 
tion to diversified conditions. And in this, indeed, may 
be found the open doorway to a united Protestantism, 
viewed from the side of organization and administra- 
tion. The National Council of Free Churches in Eng- 
land is, as reported by Dr. F. B. Meyer, seeking to 
accomplish this end by means of an organization in 
which denominational relations shall continue to exist, 
but in which all Churches shall be known and styled as 


"branches of the United Free Church of England," an 
organization "on the model of the United States of 
America — many, but one." 

Very closely akin to this attitude of Protestantism as 
to form of organization, is the disinclination of many 
Protestants to consent to anything like a close approach 
to centralization of ecclesiastical authority. 

These three characteristics of Protestantism, adhe- 
rence to the right of private interpretation, of choice of 
form of organization and administration, and aversion 
to centralization of authority, are a natural fruit of the 
Eef ormation, and of the broad principles of equality and 
of equal rights taught by Jesus Christ, and must be 
taken fully into account in any effort to achieve a union. 

Still another phase of the subject must have careful 
consideration. The four gentlemen above referred to as 
addressing the Clergy Club of New York, are reported 
as having united in saying that ' ' the test of membership 
in the future should be purpose not creed, life not doe- 
trine. . . . The desire to live the good life, and the 
desire to serve, should be the only conditions demanded 
for membership in the Church of the future." These 
gentlemen are quoted not for criticism, nor as though 
they are thought to have spoken with authority, but in 
order to call attention to a conception that is being 
widely expressed when the Church of the future is under 
consideration. As generally stated it is that the Church 
of the future must concern itself with practise, not with 
doctrine ; that the preaching of the future must be prac- 
tical, not doctrinal. 

There is a large measure of truth in this, but it by 
no means expresses all the truth. Taken unqualifiedly, 
this kind of thinking might lead to some kind of unified 
organization, but it would not be a united Protestant 
Church, for the simple reason that it would not be a 
Church at all. It might be difficult to determine just what 
it would be. 


The writer is not disposed to defend nor to disparage 
formulated creeds; nor to defend nor disparage theo- 
logical dogma, called doctrine. But he would be under- 
stood to say that in a very important sense Christianity, 
and therefore the Church, is founded in doctrine — teach- 
ing, truth ; that while it exists for the accomplishment of 
certain ends of a most practical character, ends involv- 
ing purpose, life, service, yet it must of necessity, in 
seeking to accomplish those ends, adhere to and be con- 
trolled by certain fundamental principles — doctrines. A 
business concern exists for the attainment of certain 
practical ends ; but if it is to succeed, it must adhere to 
certain principles, and not simply say, "Do business." 
A municipal corporation exists for the attainment of 
certain practical ends of combined business and social 
character. But if it is to succeed, it must do more than 
elect officers, appoint policemen, and set the machinery 
to work; there must be certain fundamental principles 
agreed upon and expressed in charter or otherwise, that 
shall serve as controlling factors in the conduct of the 
city — the doctrines of the city. The same is true as to 
both state and national affairs. The Church, whether 
many or one, must in the very nature of the case have 
and hold certain fundamental principles — doctrines — if 
it is to live. 

This becomes still more apparent when we consider 
the Church as the expression and exponent, not of its 
own conceptions, but of the revelation of God as pre- 
sented in the divine Word and in His Son Jesus Christ ; 
and still more clear when we recognize the fact that the 
fundamental requirement of the revelation of God is not 
"do" nor "live," but "believe"; believe in order to do, 
of course ; believe in order to live ; but first, believe. 

Believing is an act of the mind, and is concerned with 
truth. Hence the first inquiry necessarily is, "What is 
it that I shall believe?" "What shall I hold as funda- 
mental to Christian character and to Christian living!" 


Dr. Alexander MacLaren says, "Possibly the error of our 
forefathers was in cutting too loose from practise. The 
temptation of this day is precisely the opposite. ' Con- 
duct is three-fourths of life,' says one of our teachers. 
Yes, but what about the fourth fourth, which underlies 
conduct? This generation tends to cut loose from faith, 
and to look for grapes from thorns and figs from this- 
tles. Wrong thinking will not lead to right doing." 
Right at this point is the direct call, the imperative 
necessity for doctrine — truth — truth found in the divine 

It has been at this point perhaps most of all that 
Protestantism has divided ; and the fact that doctrine — 
truth — is so fundamental and essential as expressing the 
content of faith and the guide to living, has been all the 
more the occasion of division. The difficulty is not that 
the various bodies of Protestantism do not agree on any- 
thing as fundamental, but that in the judgment of some 
the fundamentals embrace so much more than in the 
judgment of others. Viewed from this side it must be 
apparent that if there is to come a united Protestantism, 
there must be reached an agreement on the few funda- 
mental truths — fundamental as to character and conduct, 
and then large liberty be given for the exercise of indi- 
vidual judgment as to the relation of truth that lies be- 
yond the realm of fundamentals. 

These things have been stated not to create the im- 
pression that organically united Protestantism is an im- 
possibility, nor that it is impracticable; but to call at- 
tention to some conditions to be met in the movement 
toward its realization, and to show that however desir- 
able it may be, it is not an end to be hurriedly attained ; 
that it cannot "come quick," unless by quick is meant a 
very considerable period of time. God moves slowly in 
accomplishing great ends. 

Having thus sketched the situation, the conditions 


occasioning and growing out of division, we recur to the 
original question: Is such a union practicable? 

"Without hesitancy the writer affirms that it is prac- 
ticable, though difficult of attainment. Practicable be- 
cause it is clearly within the petition of our Lord. Prac- 
ticable and desirable, both because it comes within that 
petition, and because of its tremendous value and im- 
portance in meeting the divine requirements both to 
evangelize and to transform the whole world. 

But if practicable, how is it to be attained? This too 
is a great question. Unquestionably every element in 
the answer must be in complete harmony with the teach- 
ing of the divine Word. A few general principles may 
be presented. 

1. Any effort in that direction must be born of and 
fostered by the same Spirit that prompted Jesus to pray 
for it, and to the end that the world may be led to believe 
that the Father sent the Son. 

2. Any effort to give hope of success must be carried 
forward in the spirit of unselfish devotion to Jesus 
Christ and His Kingdom, and not in any sense with a 
view to the aggrandizement of men or of existing denom- 
inational organizations. 

3. Any effort in that direction must rest funda- 
mentally upon the teaching of Jesus Christ as to the 
brotherhood and essential equality of believers, out of 
which grow the fundamental predications of Protes- 
tantism : 

1. The right of private interpretation. 

2. The right to choose as to forms of organization 
and administration, subject always to the prin- 
ciples of democracy taught and exemplified by 
Jesus Christ. 

3. The disinclination to consent to the centraliza- 
tion of ecclesiastical authority. 

Under these principles there may and should be 


worked out a form of organization that will accomplish 
the following results : 

1. Preserve adherence to fundamentals as to faith 
and practise. 

2. Maintain at the highest possible plane the spir- 
itual life and religious and social activity of 
every local Church. 

3. Eeduce to the minimum all occasion for and 
disposition toward ecclesiastical competition, 
and promote in its stead the fullest and heart- 
iest cooperation in Christian work. 

4. Provide an adequate method for combining 
local Churches where it is clear that more are 
operating than can work to advantage in meet- 
ing local needs. 

5. Prevent the duplication of Churches and other 
Christian agencies beyond what needs require, 
and at the same time see that needs are met in 
neglected communities and where existing 
agencies have declined in their spiritual and 
social activities. 

6. Unite and coordinate the general corporate 
agencies and activities of existing denomina- 
tions so as to prevent disintegration and loss in 
these relations, and promote efficiency in meet- 
ing world demands and in accomplishing world 

Speaking more concretely, the plan of union sug- 
gested by Dr. P. B. Meyer, quoted above, might prove to 
be the wise initial organic step toward a united Protes- 
tantism. The fundamental condition of accomplishing 
this great end is an awakening of Protestantism to such 
a consciousness of the need of it as that Protestantism 
will make the prayer of our Lord its own prayer — * ' That 
they may all be one, . .that the world may believe 
that Thou didst send Me." 

Cyrus J. Kephart. 



By J. H. Garrison, LL.D., Editor Emeritus The Christian-Evangelist, 

St. Louis, Mo. 

Christian union, like heaven, "is not reached by a single 
bound," but we "mount the ladder round by round." 
The federation of our Christian forces into what is known 
as the Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America 
was a long step forward from mere comity, as that con- 
dition had been a previous step forward from hostility or 
fierce competition. While I was one of the earliest advo- 
cates of federation, I have never regarded it as a finality. 
It was the only possible step at the time in the direction 
of unity. It seemed a necessary step, too, in order to 
better acquaintance with each other and the cultivation 
of friendship, confidence, and brotherly love. It seemed 
to conform, too, to that Scripture which exhorts us in 
whatever degree we have attained ' ' to walk by that same 
rule," assuring us that "if in anything ye be otherwise 
minded, God shall reveal even this unto you." In other 
words, living up to the light we have, is the condition of 
receiving more light. 

Federation has already done much in the way indi- 
cated to prepare us for unity, besides mobilizing the 
various religious bodies for common tasks, too large 
for any one of them singly to perform. That fact has 
been abundantly demonstrated in these perilous times 
when the Federal Council has stood as the representa- 
tive of our common Protestantism in many useful ways. 
It has demonstrated the need and possibilities of a more 
perfect union. 

But Federation does not fully meet the demands of 



the present time, nor the requirements of Christ's prayer 
for the oneness of His disciples, nor the apostles' teach- 
ing on the subject of unity. It cannot, therefore, be re- 
guarded as a finality. The Disciples of Christ, of which 
the writer is a member, have favored it as a necessary 
step before New Testament unity can be realized. They 
never regarded it as the terminus ad quern of their own 
movement nor of the general movement towards Chris- 
tian unity. Neither was it regarded as a substitute for 
real Christian union as our Lord wished, in order that 
the world might believe. 

Is there now a fuller measure of unity among the 
Churches which have been federated, than hitherto ex- 
isted f Do they see more clearly that the fundamental 
things in which we are in substantial agreement are infi- 
nitely more important than our differences? Have we 
learned that the propagation of these vital truths in 
which we agree is sadly hindered by our divisions over 
our little differences ? Have the momentous issues which 
we are now facing made us all feel the increased necessity 
of closing up our divided ranks in order to meet these 
new emergencies! We have too much confidence in the 
Christian intelligence of the leaders of our religious 
forces and in their fidelity to the Lord Jesus than to 
answer these questions in the negative. I am sure these 
convictions do not exist in many minds and hearts ; but 
how shall they find expression in a way that will promote 
the cause of unity! 

It would be altogether too optimistic a view of the 
situation to suppose that the spirit of denominational! sm 
is dead. There are still those who are more interested 
in strengthening their denominational lines than in the 
defeat of our common enemy. It will require both grace 
and wisdom to win such people to any movement towards 
a closer unification. Their faces are turned towards the 
past, not to the future, nor to the present exigencies 


that are upon us. But shall such backward looking souls 
determine the future of the Church f The reformers in 
every age did not think so. The Campbells, who were the 
leaders in the movement for unity, represented by the 
Disciples, did not think so when they lifted their voices 
for Christian union in the midst of the most intense 
sectarianism at the beginning of the nineteenth century. 

To begin at home, what is the next step toward 
Christian unity for the Disciples of Christ? True, the 
intention of our leaders in the beginning was to find a 
basis broad enough and divine enough on which all Chris- 
tians could unite without the sacrifice of conscience of 
truth. But, like Paul, they knew only in part, and 
prophesied in part. They never claimed infallibility. 
What was this basis! Their fundamental principles 
were, the sufficiency of the Bible, the supremacy of 
the New Testament for our use, the centrality and 
supreme authority of Jesus Christ, in all matters of 
faith and duty, and union on what is common to all 
Christian believers — one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 
one spirit, one church, one name, one creed, Jesus Christ, 
discarding all creeds and practises which divide 
These seem to be far-reaching and enduring principles, 
indicating a new dispensation of truth to these truth- 
seeking and truth-loving pioneers of the new age. To 
accept them our fathers had to sacrifice their denomina- 
tional names, their party creeds — so far as forming a 
part of the basis of union — and their party spirit. Ac- 
cepting these principles, what is our next step? 

Have we been true to all that is involved in these 
cardinal principles f Have we accepted, not in word only 
but in deed, the New Testament teaching concerning the 
supremacy of love and the inwardness of the new life in 
Christ and of His kingdom! Have we all learned to 
make the outward subordinate to the inward and spirit- 
ual? Have we diligently sought the guidance of the 


Holy Spirit in understanding the deep things of Christ 
so that we are sure that we fully comprehend what unity 
in Christ involves 1 Accepting as we do the original form 
of baptism and regarding it as an act of faith which only 
believers can observe, have we been equally zealous in 
teaching its spiritual significance as the soul's dedication 
to Christ of all it powers and gifts in a covenant of 
everlasting union with Him? Baptism has been one of 
the stumblingblocks in the way of union. One of the 
steps towards the solution of that problem is a scriptural 
estimate of the comparative value of form and spirit. 
Mr. Campbell declared that, as between a believer who 
has mistaken the form of baptism, but has accepted its 
spiritual significance, as manifested in his life, and one 
who has complied with the proper form of the ordinance 
but fails to manifest the fruits of the Spirit in his life, he 
would surely prefer the former and that he would be a 
Pharisee if he did not. So felt Paul. Kom. 2 :28, 29. This 
is not to underestimate the form, but to give it a subordi- 
nate place to the spirit — a characteristic of the New, as 
against the Old Covenant. We are all sure what Christ's 
teaching is upon this subject. Both of the ordinances 
given us in the New Testament are directly related to 
Christ, and the spirit in which they are observed, more 
than the outward form, makes their observance accept- 
able to Him. It is well to be right, both in form and 
spirit; and we will do well not to underestimate the 
symbolic significance, of either baptism or the Lord's 
supper; but let us make no mistake as to the relative 
value of the letter and spirit in the sight of God. 

But what has this to do with the next forward step 
towards Christian union? Just this much: not until we 
come to a fuller realization and a more faithful observ- 
ance of all that is involved in the basic principles of the 
plea of our fathers for the oneness of believers will we 
be in a condition to understand what we yet lack and be 


prepared to supply it. In other words we must make 
our life and teaching conform to the light we have, to 
the principles we have avowed, before we can expect 
further light. Just so our brethern in other Communions 
will find that they have not been living up to the highest 
ideals of New Testament principles which they have ac- 
cepted. They, too, must come to see that party names, 
party creeds, and a partisan spirit are inconsistent with 
the union for which Christ prayed and with the needs of 
His cause to-day, before they will be prepared to take 
the next step. Indeed, this bringing of ourselves to the 
judgment bar of Christ's mind and righting our faith 
and practise, our spirit and our outlook, by that divine 
standard, is the next step towards the unity of the peo- 
ple of God. 

J. H. Garrison. 


Second Interim Report of a Sub-Committee appointed by 
the Archbishops of Canterbury and York's Com- 
mittee and by Representatives of the English Free 
Church's Commissions, in connection with the pro- 
posed World Conference on Faith and Order. 

A movement has been initiated in America by the 
Protestant Episcopal Church, which has been widely 
taken up by the Christian Churches in the United 
States, to prepare for a world-wide conference on Faith 
and Order with the view of promoting the visible unity 
of the Body of Christ on earth. In response to an 
appeal from those who are cooperating in America a 
committee was appointed by the Archbishops of Canter- 
bury and York and commissions by the Free Churches 
to promote the same movement in England. 

This joint conference has already issued a First 
Interim Eeport prepared by a joint sub-committee, con- 
sisting of: — (1) A statement of agreement on matters 
of faith; (2) a statement of agreement on matters 
relating to Order; (3) A statement of differences in 
relation to matters of Order which require further study 
and discussion. 

In further pursuit of the main purpose the sub-com- 
mittee was reappointed and enlarged. After mature 
and prolonged consideration it is hereby issuing its 
Second Interim Eeport under the direction of the Con- 
ference as a whole, but on the understanding that the 
members of the sub-committee alone are to be held re- 
sponsible for the substance of the document. 

# * # 

In issuing our Second Interim Eeport we desire to 
prevent possible misconceptions regarding our inten- 



tions. We are engaged, not in formulating any basis 
of reunion for Christendom, but in preparing for the 
consideration of such a basis at the projected Confer- 
ence on Faith and Order. We are exploring the ground 
in order to discover the ways of approach to the ques- 
tions to be considered that seem most promising and 
hopeful. In our first Report we were not attempting 
to draw up a creed for subscription, but desired to 
affirm our agreement upon certain foundation truths as 
the basis of a spiritual and rational creed and life for 
all mankind in Christ Jesus the Lord. It was a matter 
of profound gratitude to God that we found ourselves 
so far in agreement. No less grateful were we that even 
as regards matters relating to Order we were able to 
hold certain common convictions, though in regard to 
these we were forced to recognize differences of inter- 
pretation. We felt deeply, however, that we could not 
let the matter rest there; but that we must in confer- 
ence seek to understand one another better, in order to 
discover if even on the questions on which we seemed to 
differ most we might not come nearer to one another. 

1. In all our discussions we were guided by two con- 
victions from which we could not escape, and would not, 
even if we could. 

It is the purpose of our Lord that believers in Him 
should be one visible society, and this unity is essential 
to the purpose of Christ for His Church and for its 
effective witness and work in the world. The conflict 
among Christian nations has brought home to us with a 
greater poignancy the disastrous results of the divi- 
sions which prevail among Christians, inasmuch as they 
have hindered that growth of mutual understanding 
which it should be the function of the Church to foster, 
and because a Church which is itself divided cannot speak 
effectively to a divided world. 

The visible unity of believers which answers to our 
Lord's purpose must have its source and sanction, not 
in any human arrangements, but in the will of the One 


Father, manifested in the Son, and effected through the 
operation of the Spirit; and it must express and main- 
tain the fellowship of His people with one another in 
Him. Thus the visible unity of the Body of Christ is not 
adequately expressed in the cooperation of the Christian 
Churches for moral influence and social service, though 
such cooperation might with great advantage be carried 
much further than it is at present; it could only be 
fully realized through community of worship, faith 
and order, including common participation in the Lord's 
Supper. This would be quite compatible with a rich 
diversity in life and worship. 

2. In suggesting the conditions under which this vis- 
ible unity might be realized we desire to set aside for 
the present the abstract discussion of the origin of the 
Episcopate historically, or its authority doctrinally; 
and to secure for that discussion when it comes, as it 
must come, at the Conference, an atmosphere congenial 
not to controversy, but to agreement. This can be done 
only by facing the actual situation in order to discover 
if any practical proposals could be made that would 
bring the Episcopal and Non-Episcopal Communions 
nearer to one another. Further, the proposals are 
offered not as a basis for immediate action, but for 
the sympathetic and generous consideration of all 
the Churches. 

The first fact which we agree to acknowledge is that 
the position of Episcopacy in the greater part of Chris- 
tendom as the recognized organ of the unity and con- 
tinuity of the Church is such that the members of the 
Episcopal Churches ought not to be expected to abandon 
it in assenting to any basis of reunion. 

The second fact which we agree to acknowledge is 
that there are a number of Christian Churches not 
accepting the Episcopal order which have been used by 
the Holy Spirit in His work of enlightening the world, 
converting sinners, and perfecting saints. They came 
into being through reaction from grave abuses in the 
Church at the time of their origin, and were led in re- 


sponse to fresh apprehensions of divine truth to give 
expression to certain types of Christian experience, 
aspiration and fellowship, and to secure rights of the 
Christian people which had been neglected or denied. 
In view of these two facts, if the visible unity so much 
desired within the Church and so necessary for the testi- 
mony and influence of the Church in the world is ever to 
be realized, it is imperative that the Episcopal and Non- 
Episcopal Communions shall approach one another not 
by the method of human compromise, but in correspond- 
ence with God's own way of reconciling differences in 
Christ Jesus. What we desire to see is not grudging 
concession, but a willing acceptance for the common en- 
richment of the united Church of the wealth distinctive 
of each. 

Looking as frankly and as widely as possible at the 
whole situation, we desire with a due sense of respon- 
sibility to submit for the serious consideration of all the 
parts of a divided Christendom what seem to us the 
necessary conditions of any possibility of reunion: 

1. That continuity with the Historic Episcopate 
should be effectively preserved. 

2. That in order that the rights and responsibilities 
of the whole Christian community in the government of 
the Church may be adequately recognized, the Episco- 
pate should reassume a constitutional form, both as 
regards the method of the election of the bishop as by 
clergy and people, and the method of government after 
election. It is perhaps necessary that we should call to 
mind that such was the primitive ideal and practise of 
Episcopacy and it so remains in many Episcopal com- 
munions to-day. 

3. That acceptance of the fact of Episcopacy and 
not any theory as to its character should be all that is 
asked for. We think that this may be the more easily 
taken for granted as the acceptance of any such theory 
is not now required of ministers of the Church of Eng- 
land. It would no doubt be necessary before any arrange- 
ment for corporate reunion could be made to discuss the 
exact functions which it may be agreed to recognize as 


belonging to the Episcopate, but we think this can be left 
to the future. 

The acceptance of Episcopacy on these terms should 
not involve any Christian community in the necessity of 
disowning its past, but should enable all to maintain the 
continuity of their witness and influence as heirs and 
trustees of types of Christian thought, life and order, not 
only of value to themselves but of value to the Church as 
a whole. Accordingly we hope and desire that each of 
these Communions would bring its own distinctive con- 
tribution, not only to the common life of the Church, but 
also to its methods of organization, and that all that is 
true in the experience and testimony of the uniting Com- 
munions would be conserved to the Church. Within such 
a recovered unity we should agree in claiming that the 
legitimate freedom of prophetic ministry should be care- 
fully preserved; and in anticipating that many customs 
and institutions which have been developed in separate 
communities may be preserved within the larger unity of 
which they have come to form a part. 

We have carefully avoided any discussion of the 
merits of any polity, or any advocacy of one form in 
preference to another. All we have attempted is to 
show how reunion might be brought about, the conditions 
of the existing Churches and the convictions held regard- 
ing these questions by their members being what they 
are. As we are persuaded that it is on these lines and 
these alone that the subject can be approached with any 
prospect of any measure of agreement, we do earnestly 
ask the members of the Churches to which we belong to 
examine carefully our conclusions and the facts on which 
they are based, and to give them all the weight that they 

In putting forward these proposals we do so because 
it must be felt by all good-hearted Christians as an in- 
tolerable burden to find themselves permanently sep- 
arated in respect of religious worship and communion 
from those in whose characters and lives they recognize 
the surest evidences of the indwelling Spirit ; and because, 
as becomes increasingly evident, it is only as a body, pray- 
ing, taking counsel, and acting together, that the Church 
can hope to appeal to men as the Body of Christ, that 


is Christ's visible organ and instrument in the world, in 
which the Spirit of brotherhood and of love as wide as 
humanity finds effective expression. 


G. W. Bath: and Well: 

E.Winton : 
C. Oxon: 
W. T. Davison. 
A. E. Garvie. 
H. L. Goudge. 
J. Scott Lidgett. 
W. B. Selbie. 
J. H. Shakespeare. 
Eugene Stock. 
William Temple. 
Tissington Tatlow (Hon. Sec). 
H. G. Wood. 
March, 1918. 


By the Ven. John Wakeford, Archdeacon of Stow, England. 

In all the stir of these times the importance of unity of 
plan and unity of action is everywhere recognized. It is 
seen that allies must move under one control, that Army 
and Navy must work in close co-operation, and that no 
abundance of zeal or courage serves the common cause 
so truly or so effectively as conference in council and har- 
mony in action. And in our national life one of the most 
striking effects of the great war has been that unifying of 
our forces and interests which has given us a re-birth as 
a people and has made us gratefully aware that Britain is 
one and sound at heart. There are now no pleas for 
party or apologists for dissension ; the enemy at the gate 
has made us all friends within. And without argument it 
is allowed that division is danger and that class interest 
is in some degree a treason to the nation and the com- 

Before the Saxon kingdoms were welded into one state 
their people were all of one Church. It was Christianity 
that first taught the principle of national unity and inter- 
national fellowship. It was a religious ideal that first 
moved the soldiery of the European nations to march to- 
gether for the recovery of the sepulchre of Christ from 
the hands of the Saracens. And the world to-day having 
learned its lessons of fellowship and co-operation in the 
school of experience has little patience for a divided 
Christianity and much doubt of the saving power of a 
religion that seems to have lost its first principles. And 
we may be quite sure that unity is indeed one of the first 
principles of our faith. 

All Christianity begins in Christ. He is not only the 
Supreme Teacher. He is also the living Head of that 



Body which comprises all Christian people. To be a 
Christian is to be a member of His society ; and it is im- 
possible to be related to Him and at the same time sepa- 
rate from the other members of His society. The book 
which holds its place in the New Testament after the four 
Gospels is the book of the Acts. This book is the record 
of the first vigorous movement of a Divine society 
amongst men. The first disciples received together the 
gift of the Holy Spirit when they were ' ' all with one ac- 
cord in one place.' ' And at once when three thousand 
converts were added to their number "all that believed 
were together and had all things common." The social 
life of the Church was one of its most marked spiritual 
characteristics in the first age; all men might know the 
disciples of the Lord by their manifest love for one an- 

To-day we see everywhere a condition of things that 
mocks our claim to be members of this Apostolic Church. 
He that died that He might draw all men unto Him and 
gather together in one all the children of God scattered 
throughout the world is invoked and claimed by some 
who apparently are surest only that they are "not as 
other men are." 

We need to begin by being heartily ashamed of our 
divisions ; we shall never reform unless we take the meas- 
ure of our failure. Why is Christianity so greatly in 
arrears in the conversion of the world? The Gospel 
is the word of love and the call to fellowship. If those 
who profess to be Christians are unloving and unbroth- 
erly their lives deny their profession. The heart of man 
needs a religion that binds up the broken heart and 
gathers together the outcasts; and it is at once evident 
that this is no Divine truth or Divine message which 
fails to expel selfishness or to kindle sympathy and lov- 
ing kindness. But our divisions do more than this ; they 
waste our forces and hinder the warfare against sin. 
The rivalry of denominations is totally different in spirit 


from emulation in good works ; and proselytizing has no 
relation to evangelizing. A hesitating convert in that 
stage of his spiritual experience that most demands the 
bracing and encouraging guidance and companionship of 
the older disciples is likely to be chilled and dismayed 
by hints and warnings that suggest to him that he has 
joined one of a number of competing associations. And 
from the mission fields abroad as well as from the great 
heathendom at home there comes the continual reproach 
that our Christianity must first heal its own divisions 
and end its own controversies before it professes to 
have a coherent or persuasive Gospel for a distracted 
race. Our missionaries are discredited, our converts 
bewildered, and the work of the Holy Ghost defeated 
by our lack of unity and charity. 

All this is generally admitted by Christian people 
everywhere. The question is now, Is there any way of 
recovery 1 We must answer at once that the Unity of the 
Christian world must be possible since it is manifestly the 
will of God. Our Redeemer Himself prayed of the Father 
that all believing in Him should be one even as the 
Father and the Son are one. We must never despair of 
the fulfilment of God's will. It is a great thing that al- 
ready there is a widespread desire amongst Christians 
for unity. This desire must inspire our prayers; and 
as we pray for unity constantly, we shall find ourselves 
by a spiritual instinct refusing to harbor sectarian jeal- 
ousy or exclusion. We shall find ourselves distrustful of 
religious tenets or practices which are merely local or 
sectional, the expression of a social prepossession or 
of a political ideal. We shall withhold ourselves from 
what is negative or destructive in faith and practise, and 
rejoice in the spiritual welfare of those who seem remot- 
est from us. 

But we may go much further than this. Our divisions 
have arisen chiefly from our reckless and unrestrained 
habit of forming our opinions lightly and then regarding 


them with too much respect. Christianity after all is not a 
matter of opinion; it is life in Christ. Baptism is ad- 
mission into fellowship, and we begin with baptism. He 
is ready for baptism who accepts the Divine Lord as his 
lord and gives Him his allegiance. It is not education 
but disposition that counts here. One might conceive of 
a good Christian who knew no formularies and had no 
views. The first necessity is personal devotion to our 
Lord and Saviour; and that devotion is the fraternal 
principle that must ultimately make men to be of one 
mind in the House of God. 

We shall never reach unity through arguments or com- 
promises. The temptation to contrive agreements of doc- 
trinal statement between denominations leaves out of the 
reckoning the graver divisions of East and West, and 
also of those religious bodies which are grouped severally 
about the questions of authority and personal freedom. 
It is possible that a merely local union by agreement would 
defer indefinitely the more important and larger matter. 
The discussion of incidents in history and the inter- 
pretation to be put upon those incidents will carry us 
further from the desired goal. To-day we must begin 
anew with fidelity to Christ; and we must value our 
creeds as terms of fellowship, not to exclude but to retain 
and to enfold. He who lives in personal union with our 
Lord and strives to do His will shall be taught of the 
doctrine by God Himself; we may well be content to be 
patient with our fellowman while he is under that guid- 
ance and tuition. 

And last, every Christian man is bound by his calling 
to be a missionary. It is in the open campaign that we 
lose our pettinesses and our exclusiveness. Let us give 
ourselves wholeheartedly to the winning of the world for 
Christ ; and our divisions will be consumed by our desire 
for the glory of God and the salvation of mankind. 

The Precentory, John Wakeford. 

Lincoln, England. 



The most outstanding action of the recent General Assembly of the 
Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. at Columbus, Ohio, was the issuing 
of an invitation to all the evangelical Churches in America for a conference 
looking toward organic union. The Continent, Chicago and New York, 
speaking of its reception by the Assembly, says it "was voted with an 
emphasis which swept the entire body into a swirl of enthusiasm. ' ' Dr. 
Joseph A. Vance, of Detroit, exclaimed, "We have fooled with organic 
union for two generations. There should be a movement now to unite not 
only Presbyterians, but all evangelical bodies. There is a great wave 
of hunger for unity at this time and if the way continues to be blocked by 
ecclesiastical leaders the masses will arise and decide for themselves. ' ' 
"The Kingdom requires haste/' urged Dr. W. O. Thompson, of Colum- 
bus. "We should not wait, but act. Throw your technicalities into 
Germany. The hearts of Christian people are together now. If the 
Churches do not recognize that fact, it is the Churches' mistake. If we 
continue to stand on technicalities and courtesies, we shall all be in hell 
before we get together." 

The sponsor for the movement was the Madison Presbytery of Wiscon- 
sin. The Continent further says: 

"The recommendation of the committee, as adopted with great 
enthusiasm, provides that General Assembly shall 

"1. Overture the national bodies of our sister Communions to hear 
and prayerfully consider a programme for Church union. 

"2. That the General Assembly name a time and place, as early as 
possible, for an interdenominational council of evangelical Churches. 

"3. That our Assembly state frankly, in this call, that the purpose 
of the council is to discuss and, if the way be clear, to adopt a definite 
plan of organic Church union. 

"Your committee, before recommending action, desires to congratu- 
late the General Assembly and through it, the whole Church, that those 
overtures show that there is an earnest desire for Church unity growing 
in power in the hearts of many, and a determined effort put forth to 
accomplish the same. It is to be noted that our Church has long been 
forward in its expression and effort looking toward the reunion and 
union of the evangelical Churches of America. 

"We recommend the following action: 

"1. That we, the commissioners to the One Hundred and Thirtieth 
General Assembly now in session at Columbus, Ohio, do declare and place 
on record our profound conviction that the time has come for organic 
Church union of the evangelical Churches of America. 

"2. That this Assembly hereby overtures the national bodies of the 
evangelical Communions of America to meet with our representatives 
for the purpose of formulating a plan of organic union. 



"3. That the Assembly's committee on cooperation and union, 
consisting of W. H. Roberts, D. D., J. Wilbur Chapman, D. D., Reuben 
H. Hartley, D. D., James H. Snowden, D. D., William McKibbin, D. D., 
Charles R. Erdman, D. D., Edgar P. Hill, D. D., Robert Mackenzie, D. D., 
W. H. Black, D. D., W. J. Darby, D. D., Edgar A. Elmore, D. D., 
J. Ross Stevenson, D. D., George Reynolds, D. D., Charles Little, D. D N 
John F. Carson, D. D., W. P. Merrill, D. D., H. G. Mendenhall, D. J>.) 
General George H. Shields, Judge John A. Mcllvaine, Henry W. Jessup, 
Honorable E. E. Beard, Robert S. Pulton and Professor J. J. McConnell, 
be authorized and directed to designate the place and time, not later 
than January 1, 1919, for the above named convention; to prepare a 
suitable invitation; to fix the ratio of representation and appoint the dele- 
gates of our body; to prepares a tentative plan of organic union for pres- 
entation, and to attend to all necessary arrangements. 

"4. That as a beginning the moderator and stated clerk be directed 
to wire the four national Church bodies now in session, asking them 
whether they will appoint delegates to such a convention on organic 
union between the evangelical bodies, explaining that we have voted in 
favor of it. 

"Dr. George E. Hunt of Madison, Wisconsin, who, with Mathew 
Allison, originated the Madison overture, was added to the committee, 
together with Dr. Joseph A. Vance and Moderator Smith. ; ' 

A deputation from the Disciples bore greetings to the General As- 
sembly a few days following this action and stated that they were pre- 
pared to accept the invitation from the Presbyterians and their commission 
was already waiting in readiness to action in full sympathy and coopera- 
tion with the Presbyterians relative to organic union of the evangelical 
Churches of America. The Disciples arose out of the Presbyterian house- 
hold and their passion for unity may be traced to the Westminster As- 
sembly, which was called for the purpose of Church unity. They would be 
untrue both to their origin and tradition if they were not enthusiastically 
in sympathy with this invitation. The sincerity of their passion for unity 
will evince itself in being foremost in action for the unity of the divided 
Church. The Association for the Promotion of Christian Unity has al- 
ready taken action, assuring the Presbyterians that they can be counted 
on to be servants in any capacity that will hasten the day for a united 

Rev. Irving Maurer, pastor of the First Congregational Church, 
Columbus, writing in The Congregationalist, Boston, said: 

"The scope of the united movement thus proposed and initiated 
includes not merely the various divisions of the Presbyterian and Re- 
formed Churches, ten in number, but other evangelical Churches, Method- 
ist Episcopal, Baptist, Protestant Episcopal, Church of Christ, 
Lutheran, Congregational and others. The earnest spirit in which this 
action was taken aroused immediate attention. It brought our own Dr. 
Gladden from his study, despite his feeble health, to attend the Assembly 
on Wednesday and to send to the platform a personal letter of congratu- 
lation. Said he in part: 'Permit me to express my profound sympathy 
and deep gratitude in your action with reference to Church union. I am 
glad that I have lived to see this day. Nothing more cheering has been 
done in my time. God grant that your great Church may see the full 
meaning of it and may mean it all, and that it may have the courage 
and strength to make it good.' 


"It was my good fortune to call at the home of Dr. Thompson, 
president of the Ohio State University, on the afternoon of Tuesday. 
I found Dr. Thompson enthusiastic. With him was a prominent leader in 
Presbyterian Home Missionary work. 'We shall all be together soon,' 
said both of these gentlemen. My reply was : ' You will find the Congre- 
gationalists ready. ' 

"As evidence of the deepening earnestness with which the possibili- 
ties of this organic Church union are regarded, may be cited the case 
of a leading Episcopal clergyman of Columbus who applied to the Assem- 
bly committee for preachers in his pulpit. Said he: 'We can let the 
matter of Apostolic succession rest for a time. What we need is to get 
together. ' " 

Commenting upon the Presbyterian action, The Churchman, New York, 

"It is significant that the Presbyterian Church waited for the Episco- 
pal Church to take the lead in the effort towards unity. The action of the 
House of Bishops in their recent session, however, convinced our Protes- 
tant fellow Christians that it was useless to wait longer for our 
leadership. Valuable as such leadership would have been and indispen- 
sable as is its cooperation if there is ultimately to be a reunited Christen- 
dom, the Presbyterian Assembly felt that the psychological hour had 
come for a venture of faith. The Episcopal Church failing them, the 
Presbyterians took up the challenge of the hour. 

"It is also interesting to note into what hands this whole problem 
has fallen. The moderator elected in Columbus is the Rev. J. Frank 
Smith of Dallas^ Texas, a graduate of Union Seminary, a man alert to the 
opportunities of the new day. The conservative and timid elements in 
the Assembly worked sympathetically with the younger and eager 
liberals. One and all felt that the hour had struck in which God would 
show men of faith the way. They proposed to trust unreservedly the 
Holy Spirit. 

' ' Great things are bound to come from such courageous adventure. 
The Presbyterian Church has done well not to postpone effort towards 
reunion until such time as our own Church shall feel inspired to act. The 
more discerning Presbyterians, however, freely acknowledge that a 
united evangelical Church which does not include the Episcopalians will 
not only miss the leadership which our Church is so well fitted to supply 
in any movement towards unity, but that our exclusion from the confer- 
ences will make the problem of unity more precarious and difficult later. 
But they could not wait any longer for the fellowship which we have 
shown such reluctance to offer. 

"The Presbyterian Church is trusting these matters to the younger 
men. If the Episcopal Church is to take any effective action toward 
unity, we shall have to place more confidence in the younger generation. 
Committees appointed to meet the overtures of sister Churches must be 
selected from among men of daring faith and creative imagination, 
men who have the mediating mind. We have not done this. We have 
left these matters to men who could be counted upon 'not to give up 
anything essential ' and to hold in equipoise antagonistic views. We need 
leaders of another type, men who are so sure of their faith in Christ, who 
carry their heritage so confidently that they dare under the pressure of 
great opportunities to lift their admiring eyes from the Historic Episco- 
pate and their own competent Orders to the needs of the growing 

"The hour has come for a new leadership in the Episcopal Church. 
We congratulate the Presbyterian Assembly that it has found such lead- 


ership at this supreme hour in Christian history. God never confers the 
grace of insight upon timid souls. We have better leaders in the 
Episcopal Church than we have dared to use." 

Judging both from Episcopal and non-Episcopal expressions, the 
House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church lost an opportunity in its reply 
to the memorial relative to a joint ordination of army chaplains, signed by 
Dr. Newman Smyth and Prof. Williston Walker, representing the Congrega- 
tional Church. The Southern Churchman, Richmond, says that it "did 
not adequately reflect the mind of a majority of the Bishops, as we are 
sure it did not represent the sentiment of the Church at large. ' ' An eastern 
bishop, supporting the position of the Southern Churchman, said : 

"I cannot understand how we made such an ungracious reply. I 
voted against it myself because I did not like its tone; but it slipped 
through without much consideration. Truth was our attention was con- 
centrated that day on another case. I feel sorry for the way the matter 
was left. If we cannot do better than that we ought to stop talking 
about Christian unity. I do not believe it really expressed the feeling 
of the House of Bishops. 

Several letters have come to the editor of The Quarterly from 
prominent Episcopal rectors expressing "deep regret at the tone and sub- 
stance of the answer from the House of Bishops.' ' 

The Churchman, New York, says: 

"But the bishops might so have phrased their reply as to convince 
the petitioners that the Episcopal Church is having searchings of heart in 
this matter and is humbly conscious that some of the burden of reconcil- 
iation rests upon us as well as upon our fellow Christians of other Com- 
munions. Rome could have taken no loftier or more patronizing attitude 
toward Protestants than the House of Bishops took in their unhappily- 
worded report.' ' 

The Living Church, Milwaukee, goes to the defense of the House of 

Bishops and points out the real difficulty as follows : 

"It is that these various non-Episcopal (an unhappy, because a nega- 
tive, term) chaplains are not priests. The defect that needs to be sup- 
plied (from the Churchly point of view) is the priesthood. Now if these 
men want to be made priests, or if the Congregational National Council, 
speaking for its own Communion, wants them to be made priests, then, 
very likely, a way can be found to make them priests. But it would be 
an atrocious thing to make them priests without their knowledge and free 
consent. If, by some imposition of episcopal hands, we should perform an 
act which we assumed was that of making a man a priest and he 
assumed was something totally different, would we bear witness to an 
act of unity? Would we not really be guilty of an act of deceit 1" 

A writer in the same journal says: 

"As greatly as I should like to see a response made to any sugges- 
tion looking toward unity, I do not see how the bishops could have re- 
plied favorably to the request made to them in the recent memorial. The 
bishops are not free to ordain any one to the priesthood. Ordination 
carries with it a commission and that implies that the person ordained 


has been duly trained and proved to have the requisite qualifications for 
the discharge of his office. He must know what it is, he must believe in 
it, he must be instructed in the Faith and be apt to teach it, he must 
understand the discipline of the Church and how to execute it, and how 
to conduct its worship. No government would think of giving a man a 
commission in an army until he had been trained in its discipline and 
rules. And no such commission would be given to a man to execute at 
large without his being himself under command. So for bishops to ordain 
men belonging to different organizations, to execute their office at will, 
would not lead to unity but to greater differences than at present exist. ' ' 

Whether the action represents the Episcopal Church or not, that action 
has put on record both the mind and spirit of the House of Bishops, show- 
ing that their regard for past traditions holds preeminence over the needs of 
to-day and the call of the future. It has given the World Conference a 
big jolt. If all Communions are going to take their stand in the shadow 
of past traditions, no one to move a step toward brotherhood, perhaps Gk>d 
will raise up some movement outside of the Church to remind the divided 
and irreconcilable Church that it is daytime and that men must work for 
brotherhood or they cease to be workmen. Canon George William Douglas, 
in The Constructive Quarterly, pertinently says: 

"I contend that by His own words and actions our Lord indicated 
that, whatever His Church's primitive constitution might be, it was 
bound to change. Indeed I think it may be fairly concluded that the 
more primitive this or that form of the Church's constitution may be, 
so much the more probable — both scientifically and spiritually — that 
from time to time such form must be reconstituted; that any form 
of polity — primitive, mediaeval, of the Reformation period, or to-day — 

is ipso facto destined to be transformed Therefore for 

either Catholics or Protestants to endeavor to stick to an ancient 
form of constitution for the simple reason that it is the primitive form 
is unsound, not alone from the standpoint of biology and history, but 
also because in spiritual practise the older a form is the likelier it 
is that it must be reconstituted if its vitality is to be preserved." 

Commenting on Prof. G. W. Brown's article on the Disciples in the 
last Quarterly, Dr. J. H. Garrison, Claremont, Cal., writes in The 
Christian-Evangelist, St. Louis: 

"We are in favor of such a re-investigation or continuous investi- 
gation of the subject of Christian union in the light of New Testament 
teaching, history and present day thought and movements. We have 
"been a student of Christian union ever since we began to advocate it, 
fifty years ago. Our position on the subject for many years has been 
that the unity of God's people is something into which they must grow. 
That it must come about before the world is converted is obvious. 
But none of us have seen exactly how it is going to come. But we know 
what the general principles of unity are, and what is the spirit which 
must prevail to make it possible, and we know therefore, that there must 
be a vast growth among Christians of every name in order to its realiza- 
tion — growth in our vision of the world's needs, growth in brotherly 
love, growth in our faith and in our loyalty to Jesus Christ. 

Yes, let us re-study our position, if we are tig enough and free 


enough to do it without calling in question each other's motives. It 
takes real Christians to do that. We have already outgrown many 
of the things which have hindered us, and there are others still to out- 
grow. True, our religious neighbors have got a lot of growing to do also 
before they are ready for the union Christ prayed for, but we will do 
well to give chief attention to our own defects and seek to remedy them." 

Rev. F. D. Kershner, writing in The Christian Standard, Cincinnati, 
another organ of the same Communion, dissents from Prof. Brown's posi- 
tion. He says: 

" Unless we have misunderstood the author, he certainly interprets 
the Disciples' doctrinal position after a fashion altogether foreign to our 
conception of its meaning. Instead of being a plea, first of all, for the 
restoration of the Church of Christ, 'with its doctrines, its ordinances and 
its fruits,' we are told that it is a plea for Christian unity upon any plat- 
form which may be regarded as ' workable.' There is a fundamental dif- 
ference between the two positions. The preacher who accepts the first 
theory goes out to preach Christ and his Church with definite authority; 
but the preacher who accepts the second position has no authority except 
the dubious sanction of what must always prove a more or less uncertain 
expediency. We can not imagine the early evangelists of the Church go- 
ing out with this pragmatic idea dominating their actions. They preached, 
toiled, were martyred, because they 'knew in whom they had believed,' 
and they had no uncertain note to sound with regard to their message. 
We have always believed, and we are sure that our faith in the proposition 
was strengthened by our student career in Lexington, that" our business 
as a people is to restore the old-time ideals and enthusiasms of those primi- 
tive Christian preachers. By doing this, Christian union will come, because 
original Christianity demands union; but to put union first and the preach- 
ing of Jesus and his message to the world second is assuredly to place 
'the cart before the horse' to a degree difficult to explain." 

On another page is published the Second Ad Interim Report of the 
British sub-committee. The editorial in this issue deals with it. Under 
"Letters to the Editor" Bishop A. C. A. Hall, of Vermont, discusses it. 
Mr. Robert H. Gardiner, Secretary of the Protestant Episcopal Commission 
on the World Conference, writes of it in The Churchman, New York, as 
follows : 

"More important than the agreement as to the Episcopate is the 
statement by the committee of the two convictions by which they were 
guided. The divisions of Christianity have been perpetuated by despair 
of visible unity, and that despair has been the inevitable outgrowth of 
the idea, shared alike by Catholics and Protestants, that reunion is a 
matter for human arrangement and ecclesiastical concordats. Because 
the committee were convinced that 'the visible unity of believers which 
answers to our Lord's purpose must have its source and sanction, not in 
any human arrangements, but in the will of the One Father, manifested 
in the Son, and effected through the operation of the Spirit,' they had 
faith in the possibility of the accomplishment of our Lord's purpose 
that believers in Him should be one visible society, and vision to perceive 
that this unity is essential to His purpose for His Church and for its 
effective witness and work in the world. It marks a great advance that 
God's will, not man's, should be put first. 

"The underlying note of the report is its deep humility, its Chris- 
tian love and earnest desire to lay aside all partisanship. The 'faults 


of pride and self-sufficiency, ' for which our General Convention in 
1910 apologized so amply in suggesting the World Conference, have 
been overcome in this report, and its spirit should be emulated by the 
other commissions in preparing their statements for the World Confer- 
ence. If it is taken as seriously as it should be, it may affect deeply the 
preparations for the Conference. It has always been manifest that if 
the Churches would take up seriously the effort to understand and ap- 
preciate each other in the preparations for the Conference, the need for 
the Conference might pass away. The road to reunion is the way of love, 
the only way for Christ's men. 

"The form of the report leaves something to be desired. It is too 
much in the form of an ecclesiastical concordat without appeal to the 
great numbers of men and women from whose eyes the vision of the 
King in His beauty has been hidden by the smoke and dust of sec- 
tarian controversies. Our Lord's prayer for unity was intensely prac- 
tical and full of common sense. Statements with regard to reunion 
should be the positive, evangelistic proclamations of a living faith, and 
not merely ecclesiastical concordats to adjust past controversies. They 
should be composed for the world, not only for ecclesiastics. They should 
be based on theology, for true theology is the profoundest exercise of 
sound, though finite, reason, but we must translate our formal theology 
into terms of life." 

The interest in Christian unity in England is deepening with the great 
tragedy of the war. In a dispatch from London to the Baltimore American 
it is said: 

"The British Congregational Union has endorsed a recommenda- 
tion on Free Church Federation, adopted by the representatives of the 
Evangelical Free Churches. Sir Charles Wakefield, former Lord Mayor 
of London, believes that the time is opportune for a much bolder step 
towards Church unity within the British Empire, and he sets forth his 
views in the English press. Ever since, as Lord Mayor, Sir Charles 
suggested that the Churches should sink their differences and concen- 
trate upon essentials, he has been looking eagerly for some movement 
among religious leaders testifying to their realization of the urgent 
need of unity. 

" 'We are missing,' he said^ 'one of the finest opportunities that 
ever presented itself to any nation. We are throwing away, simply for 
want of leadership, one of the greatest chances that ever came to us in 
all history. For instance, the presence here of men from every part of 
the empire, drawn to the mother country by a great moral enthusiasm, is 
proof of the unity of our race. Is it not certain that for the full accom- 
plishment of this unity it is not enough to be patriotic? Is morality 
alone enough? When the war is over and the great moral compulsion 
that brings these splendid men to the aid of the mother country has 
lost its tension, is there not some danger of reaction? What consecra- 
tion will remain? 

" 'I am certain that the one principle which can hold us closely and 
passionately together is a spiritual principle or, in other words, the con- 
viction that the whole British empire serves the same God, that all its 
peoples are enlisted in His service, and that the supreme purpose of all 
the British peoples is the religious purpose.' 

" 'Yes,' Sir Charles added, warming to his subject upon which he 
is an enthusiast, 'both the men and women from the Dominions are in- 
terested in this idea of one common British Church, even keenly so, par- 
ticularly those who are now in old England on missions of mercy, as I 


had occasion to find out for myself among our soldiers at the front. 
Perhaps you may have no idea how the serious-minded soldiers there are 
beginning to see life from a different angle. War, I tell you, is a great 
realist. These men have deplored to me the waste and the chaos of Brit- 
ish national life. They have learned to appreciate the value of unity. 
There is no experience like war to make our men realize the value of 
unity. And it is the same with the men from the Dominions. Why, 
surely, our great empire itself is a warning to the Churches, a warning 
and an illustration. Suppose that there had been no sense of unity in 
the empire? Suppose that each part of the empire had been in active 
conflict with the rest? Just think what it would have been if in this 
war the British empire had been in the same condition as the British 
Churches?' " 

The Congregationalists and Disciples have had another conference rela- 
tive to closer cooperation. This last meeting was held in New York, April 
26, 1918, the Commission on Comity, Federation and Unity representing 
the Congregationalists and the Association for the Promotion of Chris- 
tian Unity representing the Disciples. Those present from the Congrega- 
tionalists were: Rev. Raymond Calkins, Cambridge, Mass.; Rev. Newman 
Smyth, New Haven, Conn.; Rev. W. T. McElveen, New York City; Rev. H. 
O. Hannum, Holyoke, Mass.; Rev. A. P. Pratt, Greenfield, Mass.; Prof. 
Williston Walker, New Haven, Conn.; and Rev. C. E. Burton, New York 
City; from the Disciples: Rev. Finis S. Idleman, New York City; Rev. 
H. C. Armstrong, Baltimore, Md. ; Rev. F. W. Burnbam, Cincinnati, Ohio; 
and Rev. Peter Ainslie, Baltimore, Md. Theological discussions were dis- 
pensed with, as in former meetings all misunderstandings had been cleared 
up. Practical problems consumed the day's discussions and it was voted: 

"1. That at some convenient time in the near future a joint con- 
ference be arranged between these two bodies, to consist of at least fifty 
from each body, for the purpose of frank discussion of our common 
problems and hindrances to our closer cooperation with the hope that out 
of such a gathering may come a strong sentiment for a more definite 
advance toward unity. 

11 2. That a committee consisting of the chairman and one other 
member of each commission be appointed with power to take action in 
calling the joint conference as voted. 

"3. That the Disciples furnish to the Congregationalists and like- 
wise the Congregationalists furnish to the Disciples (through the organi- 
zations here represented) the names of such persons as would be inter- 
ested in the larger cooperation of these two bodies, with the purpose of 
sending them literature from time to time, giving direct information 
regarding these respective Communions. 

if 4z. That steps be taken by each denomination to secure interde- 
nominational gatherings in its own colleges and seminaries as far as 
possible in which the ministers of all Churches in the vicinity be invited 
to meet in conference. 

"5. That for purposes of mutual education and fellowship, we would 
recommend to committees charged with preparation of state meetings of 
Disciples and Congregationalists that each invite representatives of the 
other to address their respective gatherings. 

"6. That arrangements be made to hold joint state conventions, 
especially in the states where the Congregationalists and Disciples are 
approximately of equal strength, with the hope that out of these joint 


conventions in those states where one or the other is strong, or both 
are strong, similar conventions may be held with a view to closer co- 
operation throughout the nation. 

"7. That Drs. Burton and Burnham be appointed to carry out the 
foregoing resolution in such states as they may deem feasible. ' \ 

Both the spirit and discussion indicated the possibility of a readiness 
to carry .out the recommendations. In many of the Bay State and district 
meetings official representatives were exchanged and plans are now under 
way for the joint meetings in state gatherings. 

On June 2, 1918, Rev. H. C. Armstrong, graduate of Cotner University 
and Yale University, was inducted into the office of Secretary of the As- 
sociation for the Promotion of Christian Unity and at the same time in- 
stalled as one of the ministers of the Christian Temple, Baltimore. The 
services were held in the Christian Temple on Sunday morning, attended by 
representatives, officially appointed, from the various Communions of the 
city, as well as organizations from the Temple. A letter from Cardinal 
Gibbons was read. Ninety persons formed the procession. Mr. Armstrong 
will give much time to public addresses in the cause of Christian unity. 
His office is at Seminary House, Baltimore, Md. 

The Christian Science Monitor, Boston, is an instance of how one re- 
ligious body alone sustains with credit to itself a daily paper. In the New 
York American and other papers the Roman Catholics are agitating the 
question of a Roman Catholic daily. Why cannot Protestants loosen their 
hold on their weekly journals, which in most cases are doing so much 
to perpetuate divisions, and unite in establishing a Chrstian daily paper, if 
not to include all Christendom, certainly the Protestant faction of it? 
These times call for just such a paper and it will not be surprising if it is 
launched before the war closes or perhaps in the long and weary days of re- 

Bishop Charles H. Brent's Easter letter in the Southern Churchman, 
Richmond, Va., is a straightforward call for Christian unity; at the same 
time it reveals the pathos and folly of a divided Christendom. He said: 

"Just as now is the time to strike for the unity of nations so is it 
the time to strike for the unity of the Churches. I wonder how many 
people at home realize that our chief difficulty in connection with the 
morals of the army is due to the divided Church. You meet it at every 
turn. Many feel it so keenly that they can see no enduring or substantial 
good coming out of our purely physical or human effort without some 
movement pari passu earnestly aiming for a Kingdom of God among men 
not divided against itself. 

"Last Sunday I was with our fellows just before they went into the 
great battle, some of them to die before the week closed. In one place 
the chaplain asked for the use of the Church. It was refused. The 
school house was refused. The little town was so crowded with sol- 
diers that the only place we could find for service where we were wel- 
come was a barnyard. There under the wide-spreading eaves of a great 


barn we set up an improvised altar. The French peasants and the cattle 
that stood by were hospitable to us. The weather was bleak and dull. 
It was Bethlehem over again as the massed khaki knelt in the litter of 
straw before the Christ of Bethlehem. There was no room for Him in 
the inn. All that exclusiveness can do is to shut out men from itself 
and drive them nearer to God. Sometimes ecclesiasticism is so cold 
and cruel with its anathemas and lack of vision that one wonders how 
God can continue to use it for His kingdom — if He does. 

"It seems to me the time has come for us to do something daring 
and loving for the Kingdom's sake. It is antediluvian to continue 
thinking in mere terms of continuity or of yesterday. We must both 
think and act in terms of the new order, in terms of the Kingdom of 
God. Individual effort of course must be continued and has its effect. 
But the Churches should act. The constitutional assembly of every one 
should meet for the definite purpose of moving for a conference on the 
peace of the Churches, with no other aim to distract — our own General 
Convention should lead. Not the House of Bishops alone but the whole 
Convention. Then the Churches willing to share in such a conference 
should do so regardless of those which might choose to sit apart. The 
world is falling to pieces, the Churches are tagging on behind the armies, 
and nothing is being done that is worthy the name of witness bearing 
for unity as Christ begs of us to interpret it. Happy the Church that 
takes the lead in such an adventure of faith! I have often thought of 
our late determination to reach the Russian Church. We were not too 
early but too late, much too late, too diplomatic, too calculating. 

"In the American Expeditionary Forces I can do more in behalf of 
unity in the work that has been chosen me than in any other task at the 
moment at any rate. It may not be much but it is something." 

At the recent meeting of the Annual Council of the Protestant Episco- 
pal Diocese of Virginia, meeting in Leesburg, strong resolutions were 
passed regarding Christian unity. The Association for the Promotion of 
Christian Unity has sent out requests to various Communions to take 
similar action at their state and district meetings as preparation for some- 
what definite action at the national gatherings in the fall. 

Many difficulties lie in the way of unity. One of the most stubborn is 
that of a small and obstinate minority such as caused so much trouble in 
the Presbyterian unity in Scotland. A like condition arose here when the 
Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. and the Cumberland Presbyterians 
united. After battling amid many legal technicalities the merger has 
finally been ratified by the courts, about which The Congregationalist, Bos- 
ton, says: 

"Legal decisions putting beyond doubt the results of otherwise 
completed Presbyterian mergers have just been favorably made public 
by the courts. After twelve years, the Supreme Court of the nation has 
validated the union of the Northern Presbyterian and Cumberland 
Churches, consummated so far as the action of the General Assemblies 
in both bodies and the concurrence of their Presbyteries were con- 
cerned in 1906. It is an interesting example of the law's delays which 
put possibilities of trouble-making in the hands of small but obstinate 


minorities. The merging of three down-town Churches in New York 
involved no such hindering delays. " 

Now and then the subject of baptism comes to the front in our dis- 
cussions of Christian unity and it is proper that it should. All subjects 
upon which Christians differ should be honestly faced and discussed with- 
out passion. According to The Living Church, Milwaukee, Bishop J. H. 
Darlington in his diocesan convention at Harrisburg, Pa., said that we may 
have made a mistake in not assuming baptism to be the common factor 
about which unity may be realized. Continuing, he said: 

"In each case it is first, repentance, and second, faith, but the 
massive stone baptismal font standing by the transept door of most of 
our Churches is permanent in its position and teaching power, a silent 
witness to all who enter at time of service or for private prayer, and a 
hundred times larger than the small silver chalice and paten which are 
only visible when the Eucharist is celebrated. We should not teach 
less the comfort, the power, and the universal need of the Holy Com- 
munion, but we should have a revival and renewal of apostolic preach- 
ing and teaching of the apparently neglected and forgotten truths of 
Holy Baptism, knowing that it was required even of our Lord Jesus 
Christ in the River Jordan by the hands of John the Baptist, and that 
the delivering of the children of Israel from the Red Sea but prefigured 
its cleansing, saving power; that our Savior Christ' saith, 'None can 
enter into the Kingdom of God except he be born anew of water and 
the Holy Ghost ; f and that even our Lord's death and tomb are em- 
blemed when we are buried with Christ in Baptism. As even lay bap- 
tism when performed with water, in the name of the Trinity, is un- 
questionably valid, the recognition and emphasizing of this family 
union in Christ will prove a firm first step to further explanations, 
adjustments, and reconciliation. If we realize we are indeed * Children 
of One Father,' the Holy Spirit will in good time (let us hope it is not 
far distant) show us how without giving up any vital truth, or lowering 
of ideals, we can live 'with one mind in one house,' in complete unity." 

He asked this significant question, which opens up one of the great 
problems in Christian unity: "Have we not built up the denominational 
fences too high, and can we not lay aside temporarily exact agreement on 
all matters after baptism, so long as we are united in what constitutes 
birth and membership in the Church of God." 

Misunderstandings must be cleared up in our approaches to each other. 
Patched up peace does not hold any more in religion than in politics. In 
many instances there are to be acknowledgments of error and" evidences 
of repentence. Nothing so well illustrates this as the following from The 
Quarterly Register, Edinburg: 

1 1 

The French Protestant Federation, which embraces all the French 
Protestant Churches, has published its answer to the three Lutheran 
Scandinavian Bishops (of Upsala, Christiania, and Seeland) who in- 
vited them to the proposed Conference of representatives of the 


Churches of neutral and belligerent countries, to be held for the purpose 
of seeking means to restore the spiritual unity of Christianity, but at 
which questions affecting the origin and conduct of the War are not to 
be raised. The reply is a courteous and dignified document, but is at 
the same time a firm and reasoned negative. In the opinion of the sig- 
natories, the hour when their lives and homes are threatened by an un- 
just aggression, is scarcely a time for entering into conference with 
men, however well-intentioned, whose soldiers are slaying their sons 
and brothers in battle and still devastating large portions of their father- 
land. It is their conviction that spiritual communion, if it is not to be 
a vain and empty shadow, must primarily consider those very questions 
of right and justice which by postulate are taboo. A shameful silence 
on all such points would only create a false situation, and Christianity, 
under an appearance of amity, remaining fundamentally divided, would 
have no real radiance about it. It will only again become pure and 
strong in the loyal search and courageous proclamation of the truth. 

"Accordingly, the French Protestants, in their turn, address an 
appeal to their neutral brethren to contribute to the restoration of the 
spiritual communion, not by inviting the belligerents to suppress ques- 
tions of responsibility, but by addressing themselves with all sincerity 
to the solving of these very questions. In this the Federation without 
doubt gives voice to the unanimous views of the French Protestant 
Churches. If Love is to be a guest at the Conference, it must be ac- 
companied by — Truth. Not otherwise can we escape the atmosphere of 
mere futility and sham. 

"The reply is signed by M. Ed. Gruner, president of the Federa- 
tion, and by MM. Jules Pfender, A. Juncker, and Raoul Allier, vice- 

Christian unity is much talked about among the Churches in China. 
The Continent, Chicago and New York, says: 

"At a meeting at Nanking, China, April 16, of representatives of 
the American Board, the London Missionary Society and the Presby- 
terians plans were formed for a federal union which looks to the 
organic union of all Chinese churches. A committee was appointed to 
work out details. On the next day the Presbyterians, who for fifteen 
years have been operating as a union, formed a provisional General 
Assembly with Dr. P. Frank Price of Nanking as moderator, Rev. Sie 
Tsi Hsi of Ningpo, vice moderator, Rev. Chang Pao Tsu of Shanghai, 
stated clerk. It is expected that the provisional General Assembly 
will be duly constituted in 1920. This entire union movement by the 
Chinese churches has taken on added significance in view of the dis- 
cussion of organic union by Presbyterian bodies in this country." 



To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — I am asked to contribute some notes on the Second 
Interim Report of a committee consisting of representatives of the 
Church of England and of representatives of English Free Churches, in 
connection with the proposed World Conference on Questions of Faith 
and Order. 

This interesting document may well be regarded as marking a step 
onward towards reunion. Let us note some leading features. While 
the signatories expressly repudiate any attempt to formulate definite 
plans, it must be right to consider what the adoption of the principles 
contained in their statement would involve. 

1. The mere federation of separate organizations is regarded as 
inadequate. This idea is left behind. "It is the purpose of our Lord 
that believers in him should be one visible society." It is as One Body, 
animated by One Spirit, that the Church must act and bear effective 
witness in the world. This would mean not Romanists, Episcopalians, 
Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Methodists, Baptists, etc. — organized 
as such — in communion with one another, while retaining their distinc- 
tive features; but the recognition of One Church in every country and 
district, whatever dissenting bodies might still remain outside (e. g., 
Unitarians or Plymouth Brethren), with one ecclesiastical government, 
carefully safeguarded against narrowness or autocracy. 

2. There would be allowed a large liberty of opinion within the 
limits of the creeds, and an elasticity of worship — such liberty as is 
enjoyed at present by different parties or schools not only within the 
Episcopal Church, but in other Communions also in varying degrees. 
This elasticity of worship would of course include freedom, under proper 
regulation, of extempore prayer. 

3. The acceptance of the Episcopate as the chief ministerial and 
ruling office is recognized as necessary for unity, without any require- 
ment of agreement as to its origin. In this connection, and to show 
that this position is no newly adopted concession, it may be allowed to 
quote from a charge of my own on the Apostolic Ministry, delivered 
4 o the Diocese of Vermont in 1910. "1 have endeavored to show that 
the transmission of the ministerial commission is, ordinarily at least 
and normally, limited to the Episcopate. At the same time it is right 
to say that the acceptance of no theory of the Apostolic Succession 
is required of either lay people or the clergy. The due transmission of 
ministerial authority may be regarded as belonging rather to the dis- 
cipline of the Church than in the stricter sense to its doctrine. So long 
as the generally accepted rule of the Church is observed, varying con- 
ceptions as to the grounds of its necessity may be held. This, as I 
understand it, is the legitimate interpretation of the phrase (in the 
Lambeth Quadrilateral), 'the Historic Episcopate. f " (The Apostolic 
Ministry, Longmans, p. 38.) 

4. This recognition of the Episcopate is properly safeguarded by 
the provision that "the Episcopate should re-assume a constitutional 
form, both as regards the method of the election of the bishop as by 
clergy and people, and the method of government after election." 



The bishop or chief pastor must be the choice of the body over which 
he is to rule as a representative authority, and he will be aided and 
checked in his rule by a representative council of the diocese. Both 
Prelacy (in the vulgar sense) and State-appointed bishops are excluded 
by these considerations, which belong to "the primitive ideal and prac- 
tice of Episcopacy. ' ' 

5. The bishop would serve not only as the president of the local 
Church, a strictly constitutional ruler, but he would be the link with 
other Churchces and with past generations. "Continuity with the His- 
toric Episcopate should be effectively preserved." 

6. As regards the absorption of other religious bodies by those 
now in possession of the Episcopate, I feel sure that I should be justi- 
fied in speaking for other bishops as well as for myself in saying that, 
as helping towards such reunion as is proposed, we would be ready and 
glad to resign our present positions, in order that a best choice might be 
possible of a person not necessarily associated with a particular past 
regime. Such an offer may sound idle in the case of man over seventy- 
one years of age; but I was prepared to make this public declaration fif- 
teen years ago at the end of ten years of episcopal service. 

7. Other obvious features of the statement need not here be dwelt 
on. It is hoped that the whole paper, which appears on another page of 
this number of The Quarterly may be carefully read and considered. As 
the signatories say, it is offered "for the sympathetic and generous con- 
sideration of all of the Churches. " It must be a matter for profound 
thankfulness that such a measure of agreement on principles could be 

Arthur C. A. Hall, 
Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Vermont. 
Burlington, Vt. 


To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — Is not Dr. P. D. Kershner'si article in your January num- 
ber an example of how not to promote unity? He says, "we have three 
theories of Church unity. The first centers in Christ alone, the second 
in the bishop, and the third in the pope. . . . Doubtless no proof is 
required for those who will discuss the paper to show that the first only 
demands our consideration. ' ' Of course no instructed Anglican or 
Roman Catholic would admit that bishop or pope is the center of Church 
unity as distinct from Christ, but setting this aside and regarding the 
statement as merely intended to indicate three theories of Church gov- 
ernment does it tend to unity to airily dismiss as unworthy of discussion 
theories which the enormous majority of Christians have held for the 
greater portion of the Church's history? Had the writer said, "In 
spite of the elements of truth contained in these theories and evidenced 
by their general adoption for so long a period there is reason to believe 
that some other theory is true," then one would have been predisposed 
to listen. What some people do not realize is that there is an arro- 
gance of Protestantism as well as an arrogance of more ancient forms 
of belief. I am one of those who look with hope to the vast spiritual 
stores of Protestant belief and practise, especially in America, and it 
does sadden me to see such a stand taken by even the professed advocates 
of reunion. If I were to write "There are only three theories of Church 
government — Papal, Anglican and Presbyterian — and of these the latter 
need not be considered." Dr. Kershner would no doubt at once see how 
little such statements helped. 


Surely the important thing is to recognize that any theory which 
has commanded the assent of vast numbers of good men has probably 
valuable elements of truth in it, however far it may be from the whole 
truth. The Catholic theologian of to-day who ignores the enormous 
spiritual results of modern Protestantism is purblind, but not less blind 
is the modern Protestant who ignores the Catholic faith of the rest of 
-Christendom. We have all much to forget and forgive and much to 
unlearn, and Courtesy and the attempt to see things from others' view- 
point are probably still the best roads to reunion. 

Yours very faithfully, 

Gilbert White, 

Gladstone, S. Australia. Bishop of Willochra. 


To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — The Union Church in Christ of Monroe, Wis., cel- 
ebrated its thirteenth anniversary on the seventeenth of last month. 
Until this Church was organized in 1905 the Presbyterians, Congre- 
gationalists, Episcopalians, Baptists and Disciples had made repeated 
efforts to sustain their own work and had failed. The mere hand- 
ful of Baptists and Disciples united and adopted the name which we 
still maintain. This organization continued for eleven years under 
the joint control of the Baptists and Disciples of the State. Their 
ministers were selected from these two bodies and their missionary 
contributions were equally divided among the two Churches. This 
did not prove to be the most satisfactory plan. Opportunities were 
too abundant for jealousies. The union was not comprehensive enough. 
Two years ago the Church severed itself from all ecclesiastical con- 
trol; adopted its own missions, one in China and another among the 
Negroes of the South; invited into its fellowship all who believe in 
the Lord Jesus Christ as their Saviour and Lord, and determined to 
show the community the advantage of systematic cooperation as 
against destructive competition. The Church now includes upon its 
roll the former members of nine denominations. The utmost unity 
exists. The Sunday-school has doubled in attendance. The prayer- 
meeting attendance averages nearly half of the Church membership. 
Two large young people's societies have been organized. The Church 
contributes at least double for its local needs and for its missions 
what it ever contributed before. We believe that what has been ac- 
complished here in this town of five thousand people can be accom- 
plished in hundreds of places. Never was the need of united Chris- 
tian Church more apparent than it is to-day. The powers of Darkness 
are united; why not the good? 

Very sincerely yours, 

Minister's House, Monroe, Wis. C. Arnold Stewart. 


To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — The British Council of the International Christian Meet- 
ing came into existence last summer, in order to discover some prac- 
tical expression of Christian unity which might affect the whole situa- 
tion. The members of our Council include Lord Parmoor, the Bishops of 
Southwark and Peterborough, the Dean of St. Paul's, and other promi- 
nent Anglicans; Dr. Selbie, Dr. Estlin Carpenter, also Mrs, Creighton, 
Mrs. Alexander Whyte, Mr. George Lansbury, Dr. Henry T. Hodgkin, 


and a number of other Christian leaders. We decided to try and call 
some sort of gathering f Christian people from all nations, and almost 
immediately heard of the suggestion of the Scandinavian Bishops to in- 
vite a conference on the lines we had been thinking of, to meet last 
December. As you may know, the Meeting then only included members 
of the five neutral nations — the three Scandinavian Countries, Holland 
and Switzerland — but from that Meeting has gone out an invitation calling 
the whole Christian Church throughout the world to a solemn conference, to 
testify "that the Cross of Christ is a uniting force that transcends all 
earthly divisions. " 

The meeting at Kingsway Hall, to which you refer, was held in 
connection with this proposal, and was itself an expression of the same 
spirit, namely, the desire to witness to the underlying unity of all be- 
lievers. At that meeting we had representatives from at least eleven 
different countries, and it was an impressive testimony to the universal 
character of the Church of Christ. 

Our work here is to spread the idea, to hold meetings, more par- 
ticularly of Church members, and, above all, to support the movement 
by our prayers. We are trusting that it may be possible to take part 
in the International Conference in September, but whatever happens, 
we believe very definitely that this is a movement inspired by the Holy 
Spirit which has been committed to us as a direct answer to prayer, and 
we trust we may go forward in faith. 

It would be of the greatest help to our efforts here if we knew that 
there was a corresponding movement in America, and, in any case, we 
ask for your prayers. 

I wish I could send you some of our printed matter. 

Yours sincerely, 

Marian E. Ellis. 
77 Avenue Chambers, Vernon Place, 
Southampton Row, W. C. 1. 


To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — We live in a rural district where there is a union 
Church building. It was built for all denominations and not to be 
monopolized by any. The Church was uncertain for several years, 
although all the while we had a good union Sunday-school. A year 
ago we concluded to make an organization of all the Christians ir- 
respective of their denominational affiliations. The spirit of union was 
certainly in the air, for there was a willingness for cooperation on 
the part of all. We completed our organization and drew up the fol- 
lowing rules of membership : first, to become a member one must 
believe in the divinity of Christ; second, he must show a good moral 
and Christian character. We accepted the Bible as our guide and no 
one was to dictate to another as to how it should be interpreted. We 
elected elders and deacons and now have about sixty members from 
the leading denominations. We have our communion service every two 
months. We have a good woman's missionary society with seventeen 
members. We regret to say that we have no minister at this time. 
We are glad to become members of The Association for the Promotion 
of Christian Unity and thereby assure you of our interest in Christian 

Very respectfully 

Turney, Mo. Mr. and Mrs. S. L. Entrikin. 



To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — The editorial in the former number of The Chris- 
tian Union Quarterly — "The Power of the Divine Plan" — is 
pathetic and must reach the heart of all who read it. How much 
nearer would we be if courtesy, frankness and love, instead of bitter 
controversy, had accompanied our search after God's Truth! Too often 
victory was sought by fair or foul means rather than Truth. As you 
say, let there be conferences and no debates. Let us all be willing to 
admit that all are not wrong except ourselves. The law of brotherly 
love demands it. Truth as clear as crystal is useless if charity does 
not accompany it. What says St. Paul on this point? Above all let 
us be heroes in the love of God and our neighbors, who are all His 
children, be they black or white, be they Jews, Protestants or Cath- 
olics. Pagans were converted when they saw the great love which the 
first Christians practised. "See how these Christians love one an- 
other," said they. Love is still possible to-day, and the further apart 
we are the more love we should show if we wish to win an unchris- 
tian world which is indifferent in religious matters. The outside world 
is watching Christians with a keen eye, and woe if it is scandalized by 
our uncharitableness, and intolerant spirit. May your inspired edi- 
torial be imprinted deeply upon the hearts of all those who are to-day 
attempting to reconstruct God's dilapidated house on earth. 

Yours for unity and charity to all, 

Raymond Vernimont. 

Roman Catholic Church, Denton, Texas. 


To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — In these trying times our Government is rightfully urging 
upon us the need of economy and we should strive to practise it in every 
way. The winning of this terrible conflict depends upon our faithfulness 
in this respect. Our President has said, "The supreme test of the Nation 
has come ; we must speak, act and serve together. ' ' The Church of Jesus 
Christ should be at the front in carrying out these precepts. And so much 
more should we listen to the pleadings of the Great Head of the Church 
that it should be as one, as He and the Father are one. 

The Kaiser is the means of sending thousands to an untimely grave, 
but that is as far as he can go. The enemy of our souls is sending to 
eternal death millions of souls. His forces are united while the forces 
of our Lord, in spite of His pleading, are woefully divided into sects, each 
striving for a separate maintenance as they cling to their respective creeds. 

The Church should be the model of economy. It is set to be the light 
of the world, therefore, should it not be a pattern of system, order and 
efficiency? Instead of this it manifests a great lack of system. Go into 
our cities and villages and note the location of Churches. Many times 
one across the street from another, three or four within the limits of a 
couple of blocks, while other needy places have none at all. 

Then these divisions must each have a separate superintendent in 
each State with office, rent and clerk hire in addition to their own salary, 
while in nearly every county in the state are found ministers who are oc- 
cupying overlapping fields, two men doing work that one would do better. 
To maintain this sort of work the state of Minnesota is expending ap- 
proximately $135,000 per year over and above what would be needed if 


the Church in the state was working under one head thoroughly system- 
atized. As the followers of Christ we all claim to be endeavoring to exalt 
his name, that we are all being guided by him. Now, brethren, look here, 
with such a record for organized work and expenditure for carrying on 
the same, imagine the Lord Jesus Christ coming to earth and applying for 
a place as manager of some business or corporation. You know that no 
company on the face of the earth would place Him in such a position. 

By way of contrast it is admitted that the state Sunday School As- 
sociation is thoroughly organized and is doing good work. It is working 
under one superintendent at a cost of less than $15,000 per year. This 
covers the whole state. This sum would superintend all the Church work 
in the state, if under one head, organized after the same manner as the 
Sunday School Association and divided into districts like the public school 
system. In this case the $135,000 per year now expended caring for creeds 
could be used for evangelization purposes, placing a county evangelist in 
every county in the state and a church in every place where needed. This 
is doubtless true of every state in the Union. 

But, we ask, how can this be brought about? 

First, we must have one object for which we are striving. As one 
man we are working for the Y. M. C. A. and the Red Cross, being all 
agreed as to the worthiness of each. The Saviour said, "And I if I be 
lifted up from the earth will draw all men unto me." This is the one 
object for which the Church should strive, and that as one man, and we 
can all consecrate our hearts and minds on this. 

Second, a basis. In the first place we need to realize that our Saviour 
meant what he was pleading for, and the Apostle's exhortations, that there 
be no divisions among you were but the expressions of the will of our Lord. 

We all recognize as Christians all those who believe in the Christ as 
the Son of God, and love Him and His followers, showing it in their lives, 
for they are keeping the commandments that we should believe in the 
name of His Son, Jesus Christ and love one another as He gave us com- 
mandment. For he that keepeth His commandments dwelleth in Him, and 
he in Him. 1 John 3:23, 24. 

Such a one may have opinions and interpret certain parts of the Scrip- 
ture differently than we do and still be recognized as one belonging to 
Christ. As separate organizations we do this. Then why can we not do it 
collectively? "Where the spirit of the Lord is there is liberty. " I Cor. 
3:17. Connect this with Gal. 5:13, 14, "For brethren, ye have been called 
unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but in love 
serve one another. For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this, 
"Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thy self. " 

Again Jesus says, "If a man love me he will keep my words, and my 
Father will love him and we will come unto him and make our abode with 
him." John 14:23. 

Does this not give us a base upon which we can all stand, "striving 
together for the faith of the Gospel," exalting our Saviour and winning 
souls to love Him? 

What would be the result? No one being asked to throw away his 
creeds or to change his opinions; all naturally taking the Bible and the 
Bible alone. The creeds would be dropped without realizing it and opinions 
expressed devoid of all bigotry, each recognizing that the other has equal 
right to "opinions" as themselves. 

As the world then would look upon the Church it would see a body 
"knit together in love," speaking and living words of life that would 
draw it unto Him who was lifted up upon the Cross, and having learned to 
love Him who was thus lifted up, would strive to know and do His will, 
and Jesus Christ would be GLORIFIED in His Church. 

Laporte, Minn. Jay E. Pierce. 


BUSOH, Author of "Christianity and the Social Crisis, " "Christian- 
izing the Social Order,' ' "Prayers of the Social Awakening,' ' "The 
Social Principles of Jesus," etc. New York: The Macmillan Com- 
pany. 1917. 279 pages. $1.50, net. 

This is one of the truly great books. It carries a great, true message in 
a most earnest and constructive fashion. The author says "this book 
had to be written. *' This spirit of urgent conviction breathes through all 
its chapters. The method is avowedly "wholly positive and constructive. ' ' 
Of his purpose the author says, ' ' My main purpose in this book has been to 
show that the social gospel is a vital part of the Christian conception of 
sin and salvation, and that any teaching on the sinful condition of the 
race and on its redemption from evil which fails to do justice to the social 
factors and processes in sin and redemption, must be incomplete, unreal 
and misleading. Also, since the social gospel henceforth is to be an im- 
portant part of our Christian message, its chief convictions must be em- 
bodied in these doctrines in some organic form. . . . Thus the funda- 
mental theological terms about the experiences of salvation get a new 
orientation, correction and enrichment through the religious point of view 
contained in the social gospel. These changes would effect an approxi- 
mation to the spirit and outlook of primitive Christianity, going back of 
Catholicism and Protestantism alike. " In this book Dr. Rauschenbusch 
has made contribution to the description and exposition of religion as it is 
really experienced, and as it really ought to be experienced. He expounds 
a gospel which takes into view all the facts of life and which at the same 
time centers in the primary purposes of God. This book should be read 
carefully by all. 

Guild. Introduction by Mr. Fred B. Smith. Published by The Com- 
mission On Inter-Church Federations of The Federal Council of 
Churches in America. 221 pages. 

This is a valuable little book on how to work together. It is something 
of a digest of what has been and is being accomplished here and there by 
Churches working together and also a book of suggestions of things that 
may be done. It deals with Community, Evangelism, Missions, Social Serv- 
ice, Religious Education, Religious Publicity, International Goodwill, and 
principles and methods of organization. 



Harper, LL.D., President of Elon College. New York: Fleming H. 
Revell Company. 1918. 153 pages. 75 cents, net. 

This is a companion piece to the same author's "The New Layman for 
the New Time." In this book as in the other the author deals vigorously 
and practically with the facts and needs of the present hour and shows 
how the Church can, should, and will meet the issue and serve and save 
the age. The temper and argument of the book may be judged by its 
dedication, ' ■ To the One Unconquerable Force in the world, the Church of 
our Christ, against which 'the Gates of Hell shall not prevail,* in full 
expectation that She will valiantly enter and abundantly satisfy the New 

York: The New-Church Press Incorporated. 123 pages. 75 cents, net. 

A notable little book of the kind more than welcome in a time like this 
when "we are in the heart of a new conflict of arms and a new conflict 
of ideas." "Never before, perhaps, did we so much need to get a firm 
foothold on the certainties of existence." The four chapters of the book 
deal with The Christ, the Bible, Salvation, and Immortality. 

Ph.D., D.D. New York : Charles Scribner 's Sons. 246 pages. $125, 

This is a volume of five lectures delivered in Japan by the author as Union 
Seminary Lecturer in the Far East. The subjects of the lectures are: 
"The World Crisis as Challenge and as Opportunity," "The Christian 
Interpretation of History," "The Christian Programme for Humanity," 
"The Duty of To-Morrow," and "What the Church Can Do." A kind of 
keyword may be found in the following quotation from the preface : ' ' The 
issue here raised transcends all local or national limitations. The ques- 
tion whether Christian is a practicable religion or not is not simply a mis- 
sionary question; it is a human question. Indeed we may say without 
exaggeration that it is THE human question, the question upon our answer 
to which our hope for the future of mankind depends. Is force to be the 
ultimate word in human affairs, or is there something higher and more com- 
pelling — the love which bears and believes all things and which, if our 
Christian faith be justified, shall never fail?" 

THE JESUS OF HISTORY. By Reverend T. R. Glover, Fellow of St. 
John's College, Cambridge University Lecturer in Ancient History. 
New York: George H. Doran Company. 225 pages. $1.00, net. 

A book on the Life and Teachings of Jesus prepared for the British Stu- 
dent Christian Movement and now published in this country. It grew out 
of the lectures delivered by the author in India during the winter of 1915- 
1916. The Archbishop of Canterbury says of it : "A wide grasp of classi- 


cal and modern literature, a keen sense of history and historical values, 
are seen in these studies on the universal adequacy of Jesus and the per- 
manent worth of His teaching on God, man, sin, the Cross, and salvation.' ' 
It is a valuable book, well suited for the single student and also for class 
or group study use. 

Coe, Professor in the Union Theological Seminary, New York City. 
New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. 361 pages. $1.50, net. 

" What consequences for religious education follow from the now widely 
accepted social interpretation of the Christian message! This book is an 
attempt to answer this question. The author holds that when the prin- 
ciple of love is used as an inclusive law for education — not simply as one 
item to be taught, but as the highest standard by which to determine aims 
and to test methods — it yields a point of view for the reconstruction of the 
curriculum, of methods, and of organization. ' * The book is thorough and 
practical. It is a much needed and highly valuable work. 

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF RELIGION. By George Albert Coe, Professor 
in Union Theological Seminary, New York City. Chicago: The Uni- 
versity of Chicago Press. 365 pages. $1.50, net. 

This is one of the outstanding books in the field of religious thought, deal- 
ing as it does in a thorough and scholarly manner with one of the most 
important themes connected with religion. It belongs to that rare and lim- 
ited class of books which are at once good textbooks for class use and also 
valuable and interesting for the wider circle of readers. It is an exposi- 
tion of a fresh standpoint. Accepting both the structural and functional 
methods and fields, it analyzes religious phenomena from both points of 
view. The author does not hesitate to draw upon his own religious experi- 
ence where it contributes to his theme, and announces his allegiance to 
the Christian religion. He says, "I entertain as my own the Christian's 
faith in divine Fatherhood and human brotherhood, and work cordially 
with the Christian Church to make this religion prevail, assuming that look- 
ing at religion from the inside helps rather than hinders analysis." The 
book is intended for and will be found helpful to all who are thoughtfully 
seeking to understand religion and to become more proficient in religious 

THE AGONY OF THE CHURCH. By the Rev. Nicholai Velimirovic, 
D.D., of St. Sawa's College, Belgrade. With Foreword by the Rev. 
Alexander Whyte, D.D. London: Student Christian Movement. 1917. 
125 pages. 75 cents. 

No finer word on Church unity has been sounded than in these pages 
by Dr. Velimirovic, being lectures which he delivered originally at St. 
Margaret's, Westminster. Dr. Whyte 's foreword is particularly signifi- 
cant when he says, "The Eastern Church, the Church of the Apostles and 
the mother of us all, in this book speaks to her children in all lands and in 


all languages, and to us, with an authority and a wisdom and a tenderness 
all its owd." Passing from the introductory chapter, the four chapter* 
deal with the wisdom, drama, agony and victory of the Church. Father 
Nicholas, by which he is best known in the Student Christian Movement, 
is a Serbian priest, whose sacrifice and service are the best interpreta- 
tion of his own creed. 

From both a soteriological and theological viewpoint the life drama 
of Jesus had a cosmic greatness involving both heaven and earth and both 
ends of the world's history. His church must live through His agony, ex- 
ternal and internal, that he lived through. Patriotism as interpreted by 
the Jews and imperialism as interpreted by the Romans were the external 
conflicts, both being natural qualities, but Christianity is supernatural. 
Its internal struggle had to do with doctrinal and ethical standards — Who 
was Jesus? And how do we worship Him? These came gradually, prag- 
matically, according to the questions and doubts raised in the Christian 
communities. In this dramatic history the Church, struggling against pa- 
triotism, pleaded humanity; struggling against imperialism, pleaded for 
spirituality; struggling against heretics, pleaded for unity; struggling 
against worldly philosophy, pleaded for a sacred and pragmatic wisdom. 
But the Church came out of all these conflicts badly wounded. She has 
become the servant of patriotism, imperialism, isolation and worldly phi- 
losophy, leaving her a sick institution. Political governments direct her 
movements and control her prayers, so that in the survey of all nations the 
Church loyally supports the various governments. Consequently when you 
know the policy of a government you may be sure the Churches under that 
government support that policy. 

Because of internal quarrels, fruitless controversies and paralyzing 
mutual accusations, Dr. Velimirovic compares the results as revealed in the 
modern Church to isolated islands, so that now the Christian Archipelago 
seems to be quite covered with stormy waves. He sees victory to come by 
sainthood and argues for the spirit of Christ, saying, "The Church ought 
to give an example to secular Europe; an example of humility, goodness, 
sacrifice — saintliness. ' f But which Church will do this? It is a daring 
challenge, but points the way under the shadow of the Cross and over 
rough roadbeds to the service for which the Church was called by Christ 
our Lord. 

fOL. VIII NO. 2 

"The greatest need of our generation is that of 
apostles of reconciliation. 99 - -JOHN R. MOTT. 




/F the armies on the European battle-field 
were divided as the churches are they would 
long ago have been defeated. Have we not ob- 
served that the church is already defeated ? Her 
only hope of rehabilitation lies in the unity of 
her forces. Look about us and see what mean, 
secondary and non-essential things divide us 
and then ask, Can the church be Christianized ? 

OCTOBER, 1918 


Seminary House, Baltimore, Md., U. S. A. 


Christian Board of Publication, St. Louis 

Maruzen Company, Ltd., Tokyo, Osaka, Kyoto, Fukuoka and Sendai 

Oliphants, Ltd., 21 Paternoster Square, London, E. C. 4; 100, Princes Street, Edinburgh 



A Journal in the Interest of Peace in the Divided Church of 
Christ. It is issued in January, April, July and October. 


Vol. VIII. OCTOBER, 1918 No. 2 



Have Denominational Schools a Moral Eight of Existence? 9 


Williams Anthony 24 

Schweinitz 30 


Gardiner . . . . 36 


Jones 61 




PROMOTION OF CHRISTIAN UNITY and is the servant of the whole 
Church, irrespective of name or creed. It offers its pages as a forum to 
the entire Church of Christ for a frank and courteous discussion of those 
problems that have to do with the healing of our unchristian divisions. Its 
readers are in all Communions. 

SUBSCRIPTION PRICE, $2.00 a year— fifty cents a copy. Remittance 
should be made by New York draft, express order or money order. 

UNION QUARTERLY, Seminary House, Baltimore, Md., U. S. A. 

Entered as second-class matter in the Post Office at St. Louis, Mo. 

Organizations for the Promotion of Christian Unity 

Having its inception in the work of Thomas Campbell, 1809, present or- 
ganization 1910, President, Rev. Peter Ainslie, Secretary, Rev. H. C. Arm- 
strong, Seminary House, Baltimore, Md., U. S. A. For intercessory prayer, 
friendly conferences and distribution of irenic literature, ' ' till we all attain 
unto the unity of the faith. ' ' Pentecost Sunday is the day named for 
special prayers for and sermons on Christian unity in all Churches. 

TENDOM, 1857, President, Athelstan Riley, Esq., 2 Kensington Court, 
London; Secretary in the United States, Rev. Calbraith Bourn Perry, Cam- 
bridge, N. Y. For intercessory prayer for the reunion of the Roman Cath- 
olic, Greek and Anglican Communions. 

Rev. Robert "W. Weir, Edinburgh. For maintaining, fostering and ex- 
pressing the consciousness of the underlying unity that is shared by many 
members of the different Churches in Scotland. 

CHRISTIAN UNITY FOUNDATION, 1910, President, Rt. Rev. Freder- 
ick Courtney, office, 143 E. 37th St., New York. For the promotion of 
Christian unity throughout the world by research and conference. 

CHURCHMEN'S UNION, 1896, President, Sir Richard Stapley; Hon. 
Secretary, Rev. C. Moxon, Marske Rectory, Richmond, Yorkshire, England. 
For cultivation of friendly relations between the Church of England and 
all other Christian bodies. 

DER, 1910, President, Rt. Rev. Charles P. Anderson, Secretary, Robert H. 
Gardiner, Esq., Gardiner, Me., U. S. A. For a world conference of all 
Christians relative to the unity of Christendom. 

1908, President, Rev. Frank Mason North, Secretary, Rev. Charles S. Mac- 
farland, 105 E. 22d St., New York. For the cooperation of the various 
Protestant Communions in service rather than an attempt to unite upon 
definitions of theology and polity. 

OF ENGLAND, 1895, President, Rev. Principal W. B. Selbie, Mansfield 
College, Oxford, Secretary, Rev. F. B. Meyer, Memorial Hall, E. C, Lon- 
don. For facilitating fraternal intercourse and cooperation among the 
Evangelical Free Churches in England. 

cer, 17 Palace Road, Crouch End, London, N. For the cultivation of cor- 
porate prayer and thought for a new spiritual fellowship and communion 
with all branches of the Christian Church. 

Association for the Promotion of Christian Unity 


(Having its Inception in the Work of Thomas Campbell, a 
Presbyterian Minister of Washington, Pa., 1809) 

An Organization of Disciples of Christ 

PURPOSE OF THE ASSOCIATION: To watch for every indication of 
Christian unity and to hasten the time, by intercessory prayer, friendly 
conferences and distribution of irenic literature, "till we all attain unto 
the unity of the faith. * ' 

Iva irdvTtc ev &oiv, mQug &b t irarfipy ev hunt myb ev aoi, Iva tml 
avToi ev ijpiv ev &<siv % Iva 6 xdaftog ^larebjj brt oh fie anioreifaic. 

Ut omnes tinum sint, sicut tu Pater in me, et e&o in te, ut et 
ipsi in nobis tmum sint, ut credat mundus, quia tu rae misisti. 

That they all may he one; as thou. Father, art in me, and I in thee, that then 
aho may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 

with the work of Christian unity, expressed in prayer and cooperation, ir- 
respective of Church affiliation, and the payment of not less than $2.50 for 
annual membership fee, payment preferably in January. Those paying 
less are counted contributors, but not members. 

COMMISSIONERS: Peter Ainslie, D.D., L,L,.D., President, Baltimore, 
Md.; Carey E. Morgan, M.A., Vice-President, Nashville, Tenn.; H. C. 
Armstrong, M.A., B.D., Secretary, Baltimore, Md. ; E. B. Bagby, M.A., 
B.D., Washington, D. C; F. W. Burnham, L,L,.D., Cincinnati, Ohio; 
I. S. Chenoweth, MA., Philadelphia, Pa.; Finis S. Idleman, D.D., 
New York, N. Y. ; F. D. Kershner, M.A., Uy.D., Cincinnati, Ohio; 
Z. T. Sweeney, L,L.D., Columbus, Ind. ; B. A. Abbott, B.A, St. 
lyouis, Mo.; E. M. Bowman, Esq., New York, N. Y.; C. M. Chilton, 
D.D., St. Joseph, Mo.; J. H. Garrison, M.A., L,L,.D., Claremont, Cal.; 
J. H. Goldner, B.A, Cleveland, Ohio; F. A. Henry M.A, LL,.B., Cleve- 
land, Ohio; T. C. Howe, Ph.D., Indianapolis, Ind.; W. P. Iyipscomb, 
Esq., Washington, D. C. ; R. A. Long, Esq., Kansas City, Mo.; C. S. 
Medbury, D.D., Des Moines, la.; C. C. Morrison B.A., Chicago, 111.; 
W. C. Pearce, Esq., Chicago, 111.; A. B. Philputt, D.D., U,.D., Indian- 
apolis, Ind.; E. I*. Powell, L/L,.D., Louisville, Ky. ; W. F. Richardson, 
M.A., L,L,.D., Los Angeles, Cal.; I. J. Spencer, M.A., L,Iy.D., Lexing- 
ton, Ky. 

WORK OF THE ASSOCIATION: The Commission of the Association is 
simply the Executive Committee of twenty-five members, nine of whom are 
the Committee on Direction, dealing with such problems as may come be- 
fore the Association for action between the annual meetings. It is pro- 
posed to use this Commission under four divisions: namely, Commission 
on Christian Unity, dealing with Christian unity in general; Commission 
on a World Conference on Faith and Order; Commission on Federation; 
and Commission on International Friendship. To all these subjects the 
Association for the Promotion of Christian Unity has spoken. The Asso- 
ciation publishes The Christian Union Quarterly. 

For further particulars, address 

Association for the Promotion of Christian Unity 

Peter Ainslie, President 
Seminary House, Baltimore, Md., U. S. A. 

Bibliography of Christian Unity 

THE BOOKS included in this list are by Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Roman 
Catholics, Congregationalists, Unitarians, Lutherans, Baptists, Disciples of Christ, etc. 

CHRISTIAN UNION, Van Dyke, Appleton, 1885 $1.00 

CHRISTIAN UNION, Garrison, St. Louis, Christian Board of Publication, 

1906 , 1.00 

CHRISTIAN UNION IN EFFORT, Firth, Philadelphia, Lippincott, 1911.. 1.50 

Co., 1913 2/6 

CHRISTIAN UNITY, Briggs, Scribner, 1900 1.00 

CHRISTIAN UNITY AT WORK, Macfarland, Federal Council 1.00 



Young, Chicago, The Christian Century Co., 1904 1.00 

HOW TO PROMOTE CHRISTIAN UNION, Kershner, Cincinnati, The 

Standard Publishing Co., 1916 1.00 

LECTURES ON THE REUNION OF THE CHURCH, Dollinger, Dodd, 1872 1.50 

land. 5 Vols 5.00 


Christian Century Co , , 50 


Scribner, 1908 1.00 


RELIGIOUS SYSTEMS OF THE WORLD, London, Swan Sonnenschein & 

Co., 1908 

RESTATEMENT AND REUNION, Streeter, Macmillan, 1914 75 


1895 1.25 

DOM, Tarner, London, Elliott Stock, 1895 

THAT THEY ALL MAY BE ONE, Wells, Funk & Wagnalls Co., 1905 75 

THAT THEY ALL MAY BE ONE, Whyte, Armstrong, 1907 25 

THE CHRISTIAN SYSTEM, Campbell, St. Louis, Christian Board of Pub- 
lication, 1890 1.00 

THE CHURCH AND RELIGIOUS UNITY, Kelly, Longmans, 1913 1.50 

THE CHURCHES OF THE FEDERAL COUNCIL, Macfarland, Revell.... 1.00 

THE LARGER CHURCH, Lanier, Fredericksburg, Va 1.25 

THE LEVEL PLAN FOR CHURCH UNION, Brown, Whittaker, 1910 1.50 

THE MEANING OF CHRISTIAN UNITY, Cobb, Crowell, 1915 1.25 


CHURCH, Ainslie, Revell, 1913 1.00 

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF RELIGIOUS SECTS, McComas, Revell, 1912.... 1.25 

mans, 1911 75 

delphia. American Sunday-School Union, 1915 75 


1895 , 2.50 


Harnack, Macmillan, 1899 1.00 

UNITY AND MISSIONS, Brown, Revell, 1915 1.50 

WHAT MUST THE CHURCH DO TO BE SAVED? Simms, Revell, 1913.. 1.50 


A World Conference on Faith and Order, time and place not 
yet named. 

At the instance of the Association for the Promotion of 
Christian Unity, Pentecost Sunday has been named primarily as 
the day for special sermons on Christian unity in all Churches, 
along with prayers to that end. 

At the instance of the Commission of the Protestant 
Episcopal Church on the World Conference on Faith and 
Order, January 18-25, 1919 (January 5-12, Eastern Calendar) 
has been named as the Week of Prayer for Christian unity. 
Suggestions to that end may be secured from Robert H. Gar- 
diner, Secretary, Gardiner, Me. 

At the instance of the General Assembly of the Presby- 
terian church in the U. S. A., a conference sometime before 
January, 1919, has been called to take steps for the organic 
unity of the evangelical communions of America. For par- 
ticulars write Rev. Wm. H. Roberts, D.D., state clerk of the 
General Assembly, Witherspoon Building, Philadelphia, Pa. 


David Owen Thomas 

was born in Wales, educated at Columbia University and is now a 
leading physician in Minneapolis, Minn. He is a member of the 
Royal College of Surgeons, England, and is a contributor to medical 

Alfred Williams Anthony 

was the chairman of the committee uniting the Free Baptists and 
Baptists in 1904 and is now the executive secretary of the Home Mis- 
sion Council, New York. He was professor of Christian literature 
and ethics in Bates College 1908-11. He is the chairman of the 
Commission on State and Local Federations of the Federal Council 
and is the author of The Higher Criticism, in the New Testament, etc. 

Paul de Schweinitz 

is the vice-president and treasurer of the governing body of the 
Northern Province of the Moravian Church, president of their Board 
of Church Extension, trustee of the Moravian College and Theological 
Seminary, trustee of St. Luke's Hospital, South Bethlehem, Pa., and 
was a delegate to the Edinburgh Missionary Conference in 1910. 

Robert H. Gardiner 

is the secretary of the Protestant Episcopal Commission on the World 
Conference on Faith and Order. He has practised law in Boston 
since 1880 and has always been active in Church work, having been 
president of the Brotherhood of St. Andrew, besides holding other 
positions of confidence. 

Edgar De Witt Jones 

has been for twelve years minister of the First Church, Disciples 
of Christ, Bloomington, 111. He is president of the National Con- 
vention of the Disciples for this year and is author of The Inner 
Circle, The Wisdom of Fools, Fairhope, being the annals of a coun- 
try church, and The Tender Pilgrim. The sermon that appears in 
this issue is from his latest volume, just from the Revell Press, en- 
titled Ornamented Orthodoxy. 


(Membership in this League is open to all Christians — Greek, Roman, Angli- 
can and Protestant, the only requirement being a notice by post card or let- 
ter of one's desire to be so enrolled, stating the Church of which he is a 
member. Address, Association for the Promotion of Christian Unity, Sem- 
inary House, 504 N. Fulton Ave., Baltimore, Md., U. S. A.) 


We have now reached the point when we can begin to appreciate the 
force of the contention that the supreme need of the hour is a catholic 
Church. If we have long been realizing with growing intensity "the 
dangers we are in through our unhappy divisions," the spectacle which 
Christendom presents at this moment should drive us to our knees in 
penitence and prayer. * * * Who can doubt that, if in every coun- 
try which has staked its all upon the issues of this tremendous and 
appalling strife, the universal Church had possessed not a nominal but an 
effective existence; if the local societies of Christians in every land had 
been living in corporate touch with one another; if the disciples of 
Jesus, loyal in heart and soul to the soil which nourished them, 
had yet been aware of a spiritual loyalty still more compelling — if in a 
word the noble ideal of the Epistle to the Ephesians had been a practical 
reality, not a sword would have been drawn, not a bolt shot, not a home 
desolated? That is about as certain as anything can be. — Canon J. G. 
Simpson, in The Conception of the Church. 


O God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Great King and Head 
of the Church, Who hast gathered us into this holy fellowship, Thou 
Who alone canst save and sanctify, and be our strong Deliverer, we pray 
that Thy Church may be set free from all her sins and frailties — from 
all unbelief in Thee, from narrow conceptions of her mission, from fetters 
of out-worn tradition, from listlessness, self-satisfaction, and blindness 
to the needs of the present, from pride and vainglory, from fear and 
cowardice, and from trust in outward things — that she may be presented 
to Thee a glorious Church, holy and without blemish, not having spot 
or wrinkle or any such thing. Hear us, O God, as we plead on behalf of 
Thy Church, as she stands confronting the great need of the world, con- 
scious of failure, humbled by her shortcomings, and yet eagerly longing 
for fresh power from on High. Put forth Thy strength and come and 
save us. Come and visit us with Thy salvation. Enable us to open our 
hearts to the Word of our Living Lord and Saviour in this our day and 
generation. O Lord, revive Thy work in the midst of the days, in the 
midst of the years make it known. — From Fellowship Litanies, No. 2. 


Our country has passed from a federation of states to which 
their inhabitants felt a supreme loyalty to a nation in which 
state allegiance is subordinated to national. The Church, with 
its communions partly federated already, must pass through a 
similar development. The ways in which a congregation will 
share one another's inspirations and bear one another's bur- 
dens will vary in different ages and in different places ; but the 
more of such ways as are opened between Christian and Chris- 
tian, the more truly that congregation becomes a Church of 
Christ. The modes in which Christians throughout the earth in 
their diverse communions manifest their oneness will be varied, 
but their unity must be felt by all of them in a strengthening 
sense of corporate solidarity, and must be shown in effective 
common action. This does not imply identity in belief, uni- 
formity in worship, or even similarity in organization; but it 
does mean a realized fellowship, whose members "in mutual 
well-beseeming ranks march all one way." A Church which 
does not embody brotherliness within itself cannot refashion 
human society into a brotherhood. A church which does not 
combine its own forces for united effort cannot expect to lead 
the nations into collective action for the weal of mankind. The 
fellowship in a village or countryside should be embodied in 
a community Church; and in a metropolitan area in a city 
Church, as conscious of its oneness as the village Church, al- 
though grouped in many congregations. To the degree that 
the Church's unity in any place or nation, or throughout the 
earth, is not felt by all its members and is not demonstrated in 
common action, the Church is not a fellowship, and is not the 
Church of Christ. — Henry Sloane Coffin, In a Day of SodcA 


Vol. VIII. OCTOBER, 1918 No. 2 



We are passing through the travail of a new birth. 
Everything is changing. The physical, chemical and 
electrical forces have essentially made a new physical 
world. The world war is so upsetting past notions of 
education and religion that we are forced to look for 
other foundations for both education and religion. Con- 
ditions that were justified in the past carry with them no 
guarantees of justification now. The governments of 
the world are making demands of their populations be- 
yond anything ever known in our time. We are discuss- 
ing conservation and strenuously practising it. To live 
with our faces to the front is to seek adjustment to the 
post-war demands. The tragedy of these times is a 
divided and national Church. While statesmen are dis- 
cussing a league of nations for the common good, church- 
men should be giving themselves without reservation to 
the discussion of a united and catholic Church for the 
saving of the lost world. 

One of the chief barriers to unity and catholicity is 



the denominational school. It is not only the institution 
of a party in a distinct sense, being controlled and sup- 
ported by a denomination, but it becomes a necessity for 
the perpetuation of that denomination, being the source 
from which denominational direction and guidance com- 
monly come. If it does not stand for a partisan inter- 
pretation of Christianity as strongly as formerly, and 
this we are glad to acknowledge, it is at least the insti- 
tution of a distinct party in the Church, whether that 
party be Roman Catholic, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, 
Baptist, Methodist, Congregational or Disciple. If the 
denominational school is not partisan at all, as some 
now claim, then there should be immediate willingness 
to consolidate with the schools of other communions, in 
keeping with the times, thereby reducing expenses and 
at the same time securing better equipments ; better spir- 
itually, mentally and physically. If consolidation for 
all denominational schools is not practical, and there are 
some in isolated sections, and if they are not partisan 
in their interpretations of Christianity, then why could 
there not be such a recognition of fellowship with united 
and catholic Christianity as would admit persons of 
other communions to membership both on the board of 
trustees and on the faculty! It is not sufficient to have 
merely one or two, but such an increase on both the board 
of trustees and on the faculty as would indicate as much 
confidence in the Church at large as had been formerly 
shown for the denomination. Any other policy but unity 
in education retards the growth of unity in the church. 
The times demand that the denominational schools face 
the issue as our armies are facing the issue on the Euro- 
pean battle-field, and not to be satisfied with their de- 
nominational isolation, but seek earnestly for such con- 
solidation of educational interest as will strengthen the 
unity of the Church in its warfare against the forces 
of evil. 


The statesmen of the Church are seeing the necessity 
of a united educational work on the foreign field and 
in many instances various denominations have federated 
their educational institutions to the advantage of each 
and especially to the advancement of a catholic Chris- 
tianity. In Canada, a striking example has been set by 
the Methodists, Congregationalists and Presbyterians 
federating their educational work of Montreal. At the 
call of President A. L. Lowell of Harvard University, a 
national conference of theological administrators and 
professors from the United States and Canada was 
called at Cambridge in August. It was a call to face 
the war conditions and seek for the necessary ad- 
justment of the times. Have any of the denominations 
a copyright on some truth that they fear others might 
get and use? Or are they fearful that their interpreta- 
tions might not have the opportunity for freedom of ex- 
pression? In either event can we not trust each other? 
This is fundamental Christianity. If we who are Chris- 
tians cannot trust each other, all our talk about systems, 
ordinances and theologies are but froth that should be 
washed away on the high tides of these tempestuous 
times, leaving us naked and unfit for the great battle of 
life. The denominational schools ought to get together. 
It is both possible and practical. These times demand 
united effort. Pride and the love of a party must give 
way to service and the love of the whole Church. 


By David Owen Thomas, M.D., M.E.C.S., England, Minneapolis, Minn. 

In the stress and transformations of this great war the 
spirit of Christianity is pervading the world beyond 
the Church, as never before, and with the awakening of 
the Christian conscience to the denunciation of every 
unfairness and wrong outside, there is a proportionate 
condemnation of every unbrotherliness and narrow- 
ness within the Church, and a more general and earnest 
desire that all believers should be one in Christ, John 
17:21. The prophets of the Church see a great revolu- 
tion, and predict that after the war,, not only the Church, 
but the world also, by repentance and a baptism of 
blood will emerge purified to a new life. 1 It is proclaimed 
that those who now fight together in the trenches, will 
then eliminate differences and wish to worship together 
in the same sanctuary after they return. The war which 
has taught us to dispense with every thing except that 
which was imperative to victory, may also teach us to 
place in the platform of union only such planks as are 
essential to salvation. But if the correct basis of Chris- 
tian union can be formulated, the greater problem is 
how to introduce it acceptably. It is enough in this 
paper to consider some of the preliminary principles 
through which this organic union and its practical opera- 
tions should be approached, and some characteristics 
that will commend its adoption. The day has come 
when, with proper accent on the great fundamentals 
only, the unification of God's people is confidently ex- 
pected. Denominational divisions arose principally 
through unequal emphasis in matters of Church polity 

J This does not mean that the war was brought on by the sin of the world, or im- 
penitence of the Church. The war was brought on by the military greed of the 
German Emperor and his counsellors. 



and deviation from Apostolic simplicity and catholicity. 
The same process was reversed by the great Reformers, 
who sought to return to primitive ideals, and kept re- 
forming until the day of their death, thus demonstrating 
that the Eeformations as thev left them were not com- 
plete. But their respective followers, perhaps with 
praise-worthy intentions to safe-guard specific and im- 
portant truths, crystallized their teachings into creeds, 
intended only as guards to preserve the faith, but which 
unfortunately grew into barriers to separate Christians. 
The reasonable course now for all Evangelical bodies is 
to transcend the barriers and not ignore the truths re- 
stored by the Eeformations ; but seek better understand- 
ing through conferences and practical co-operation in 
social service, and by comity and re-adjustment of the 
canons of faith and order endeavor to attain accept- 
able basis of Christian unity. That this basis may have 
comprehension without compromise the difficulties of the 
problem cannot be set aside by suppression, but must be 
solved in the spirit of love. Though this basis contem- 
plates one universal Church, the union of Protestants 
should naturally precede and exemplify the possibility of 
the union of Protestants and Roman Catholics. Since 
the call of Christian union is in the air, the Church which 
will not manifest earnest desire for its consummation 
must inevitably suffer the unenviable reputation and iso- 
lation which such indifference and sectarianism deserves. 
But what are some of the guiding principles which will 
prepare the way for this union, and hasten the accept- 
ance of its essential elements f 

1. Religion. The first principle of Christian union 
suggests that the problem should be approached from 
the side of religion. Primarily believers should study to 
be the right kind of Christians, then Christian union 
will naturally follow. To reverence divine and sacred 
ordinances and things, honor, truth and justice, and 


manifest kindness and love in word and deed is an open 
sesame and bond of sympathy between all good men of 
whatever faith. Fellowship is not an angular portrait 
of accurate statements, but rather the warm coloration 
of the finer instincts. The Church was founded for the 
propagation of religion, and it must be borne in mind 
that union is urged that there may be a more perfect 
experience of it in the life of the believer, and in its ex- 
pansion the evangelization and saving of the world. 
The supreme end of Christian union ought not to be the 
uniformity of creed and ordinances, but the larger fruit 
of the spirit, which makes Christian fellowship desirable 
and beneficial. Church relationship is a failure unless 
it enlarges our spiritual life, for religion is an expe- 
rience, the fellowship of kindred souls and conscious com- 
munion with God and with unseen and eternal realities. 
Without this inner invigorating experience Christian 
union will be mechanical and lifeless. It must have 
spiritual unity for its very breath, for God has designed 
that there shall be a heart touch through the living voice. 
Its voluntary bond must be from within, for love works 
not by restrictions. "Be" said Amiel, "that which you 
would make others. ' ' 

In Christian union it is a safe rule of procedure to 
narrow down differences as much as possible, and then 
approach them from some common ground. Paul on 
Mars ' Hill narrowed the breach between himself and the 
Athenians, and approached them on religious, rather 
than theological or doctrinal grounds. While he was 
complimentary he was not compromising, for though he 
recognized in their shrines evidences of the universality 
of religious devotion, he declared unto them the right- 
eousness of God and the supremacy of Christ, (Acts 

In like manner, Peter approached Cornelius on the 
religious side, and showed how God is not a respecter 


of persons or nations, but accepts righteousness every- 
where and proclaims peace to all nations through Jesus 
Christ, for "He is Lord of all," (Acts 10:36). The 
office of the Church is to increase and rightly interpret 
religion to the world in a transforming faith ; and the 
followers of Christ are invited to unite for this end. As 
Christ is the author of the faith and our exemplar, Chris- 
tian union must be pursued in his spirit, to create Christ- 
like men to further the end of his kingdom. This union 
ought to bring believers more intimately into the view- 
point of Christ, that they may have a touch of the love 
that is sacrificing, and more unselfish devotion for 
benevolence, and holier passion for righteousness and bet- 
ter living. 

2. Authority. Loyalty to the person and teachings 
of Christ, as revealed in the Holy Scriptures, is the most 
satisfactory and acceptable standard for his Church. 
For rightly interpreted this acknowledges that the Scrip- 
tures, the Church, and the conscience have their spheres 
of influence in the realm of Christian union. And pri- 
marily to acknowledge the Lordship of Christ is not only 
essential but reasonable, for anarchy or hostility to au- 
thority is abnormal both in the Church and State. 
Many besides Neander have been led to accept Jesus as 
the Christ by being primarily impressed with Christian- 
ity as an ethical system. 

A vital union of the individual with Christ implies 
imitation of Him in character, and a congregation 
formed of such members would be in harmony with itself, 
and with its own brotherhood; and these conditions 
would materially hasten the merging of the followers of 
Jesus into one communion, with one spirit. I am for 
Christianity through a progressive Church rather than 
with no Church at all, but am aware that the Church 
will have to reckon with modern scholarship and re- 
search ; for historical criticism and social studies will re~ 


quire some re-adjustment of theology. Each age has a 
spirit of its own, but there is no need that any age or 
church should place its predecessor on the shelf. There 
is no antagonism between Christ and criticism. What- 
ever concessions may be required of traditional Chris- 
tianity, the followers of Jesus anticipate no hostility be- 
tween modern scholarship and Christ. The Churches 
and even historic Christianity may need new interpreta- 
tion, yet ' i Christ is the creed that needs no revision. ' ' 

We must not lose faith in education, for sincere re- 
search seeks the truth, and new truth, though it upset 
us, is always wholesome and beneficial. The Church has 
not always known her prophets; but it is to her credit, 
that she always has been a teacher, and always made 
knowledge and purity the pathway to God, (1 John 
1:6, 7). 

In our religious profession our loyalty to Christ 
should make us heed the words of the mother of our Lord, 
who said to the servants at Cana: "Whatsoever He 
saith unto you, do it," (John 2:5). This loyalty to 
Christ should replace party spirit and selfishness with 
brotherly love — a kindly interest in all who name the 
name of Christ. 

"Let us conquer our prejudices; for our own prej- 
udice, and the worship of our ancestors' prejudices, are 
far more potent factors in keeping the Christian socie- 
ties apart than any supposed antagonistic truths we may 
hold. The truth we hold, if truth indeed it be, cannot 
be antagonistic to the truth any other man holds, but 
complementary. ' ,2 

Though denominationalism is so much in the way that 
any reconstruction of Christendom must work hardship 
on some communions, to express the spirit of oneness, 
rather than recount the items of division is the reason- 
able logic of Christian unity. For when true loyalty to 

2 Rev. J. J. Lanier, B.D., The Church Universal, p. 38, New York, 1911. 


Christ will possess all believers with the feeling of kin- 
ship and common brotherhood they will all be drawn to- 
gether, rejoicing in the bonds of love and larger fel- 
lowship. "Behold how good and how pleasant it is for 
brethren to dwell together in unity. ' ' 

3. Historicity. The primitive Church was pro- 
gressive, and met every new expediency with an enlarg- 
ing program; but the man who asked, "What must I do 
to be saved?" received everywhere the one answer that 
was acceptable to fellowship wherever he went through- 
out Christendom. There was therefore that which was 
fixed and that which was fluid in the primitive organism, 
and behind this model and its ideals was Christ and the 
apostles. The Church is strengthened by its historic 
character, and a restoration of the apostolic pattern and 
spirit commends itself. "The question of unity," says 
Bishop Fyson of the Church of England in Japan, 
"seems to me almost if not quite, the most important of 
all for the Church at the present day; and I would go 
great lengths to attain it. The only hope of ultimate 
agreement amongst the different Christian orders is, as 
it seems to me, to get back to the most primitive time, not 
to the third century, or to the second, but to the New 
Testament. That is the only common basis on which we 
are likely to agree." 3 

There was in the Apostolic Age as perfect unity per- 
haps as can be expected, and the only terms, of fellowship 
then was the "good confession." Jew and Gentile then 
alike entered the Christian brotherhood by open confes- 
sion of faith in the risen Christ, moral change of mind 
and heart, acknowledged in repentance and baptism, 
(Acts 2:38, Gal. 3:27), with renunciation of sin, (2 Tim. 
2:19), and surrender of the life to Christ, (Kom. 6:4). 
Those believers took the name of Christ (Eph. 3:14, 15), 
and endeavored to do His will, and were organized into 

"Robert £. Speer, Christianity and the Nations, p. 333, 1910. 


congregations enjoying self-government under proper 
officers. Though those congregations had autonomy, 
they co-operated sympathetically to relieve the poor 
and to support evangelists to preach the gospel. Be- 
lievers entering that fellowship declared their attitude to- 
wards Christ rather than their theological tenets and 
Christian experience. 

It would be possible to organize congregations now 
after the pattern of the Church in Jerusalem, Antioch, 
and Eome partaking of the seven-fold unity of that in the 
Apostolic Age, (Eph. 4:4-6). Then by an acknowledged 
bond of union, all believers were members of the one 
body (Rom. 12:5), and were everywhere received as 
brethren in the Lord. If the simple bond which united 
the local congregation to Christ, is sufficient for practical 
fellowship with sister congregations and with the uni- 
versal brotherhood, we should seek Christian union in the 
simplicity of the primitive model, rather than in any at- 
tempt to articulate elaborate systems of faith and pre- 
cise dogmatic definitions. If we retrace the history of 
the Church to the Apostolic Age we find its constitution 
sufficiently incomplete, or broad and elastic to fit the dif- 
ferent emergencies arising in varied geographical com- 
munities. The desire to set aside ecclesiastical measures 
and distinctions that have accomplished their purpose, 
but continue to mark division, has given rise to the cry, 
"Back to Christ.' ' The Reformations were attempts to 
return, and each reformation emphasized some essential 
truth, but there were always some conditions that could 
not be changed. It could not well be otherwise, for in 
the ecclesiasticism of the time, it was not easy to get 
rid of the bewildering traditions and ceremonies which 
had been inherited, and return to the model and sim- 
plicity of the primitive Church. The mistake of reform- 
ers was not in thinking for themselves, but in allowing 
their disagreements to be emphasized to separate them 


from their brethren, who did not hold proportionate vi- 
sion of the truth discovered. 

The Reformation for the first one hundred and fifty 
years busied itself with the purification and intensifica- 
tion of worship, rather than with the missionary expan- 
sion of the faith. In the Nineteenth Century the imper- 
ativeness that the life of the Church should expand in a 
world-wide evangelism and betterment of social condi- 
tions began to properly express itself. And we have 
come now to a time, when Christian union needs the orig- 
inal unity and purity of the primitive Church and the 
broad vision and most sympathetic conscience of mod- 
ern philanthropy, to practise a better as well as a larger 
Christianity, in response to the Macedonian cry, "Come 
over and help us." 

4. Catholicity. The Christian union basis and pro- 
gram must be distinctly Christian, or include the whole 
truth revealed in Christ, and be adaptable for the reli- 
gious needs of the whole world. This catholicity means a 
basis broad enough faithfully to include all that is essen- 
tial to a universal Church, and must avoid any teaching 
or practise which is sectarian, or does not belong to the 
essence of Christianity. Its conception of Christian 
truth must include all that is essential to the reconcilia- 
tion and communion of man with God. The sphere of 
the Church in its fullest form must fulfill the whole func- 
tion of religion, which has to do with life in its totality, 
or with the salvation of the whole man. i ' The character 
of a religion is determined by idea of God ; the constitu- 
tion, action, and ambitions of a Church are determined 
by its ideal of religion. To be unfaithful to any element 
in the latter is to be without the highest kind of catho- 
licity, catholicity as regards the truth. ' ' 4 

By catholicity then we mean, when we say, "Back to 
Christ," not simply orthodoxy according to conciliar 

4 A. M. Fairbairn, M.A., Catholicism: Roman and Anglican, p. 40, 1890. 


enactments, but a breadth of faith which will enthrone 
Christ in the hearts of men who will do His will, with a 
generosity of interpretation, according to the opportu- 
nities and requirements of the Twentieth Century. ' ' The 
kingdom of heaven is within you," not simply in some 
things, or at some times, but a constant well-spring as an 
incentive to every duty, as a motive to every good, and as 
a law of life to the whole conduct. Thus, catholicity 
would bring the life into conformity with "the whole 
counsel of God." (Acts 20:27). 

The Church must hold not simply the catholicity of 
truth, but also sympathetically and responsively consider 
the totality of the world's needs. "From the outset 
Christianity came forward with a spirit of universalis™,, 
by dint of which it laid hold of the entire life of men in 
all its functions, throughout its heights and depths 
in all its feelings, thoughts, and actions. This guaran- 
teed its triumph. In and with its universalism it also de- 
clared that the Jesus whom it preached was the Logos. 
To him it referred everything that could possibly be 
deemed of human value, and from him it carefully ex- 
cluded whatever belonged to the purely natural sphere. 
From the very first it embraced humanity and the world, 
despite the small number of the elect whom it contem- 
plated. Hence it was that those very powers of attrac- 
tion, by means of which it was enabled at once to absorb 
and to subordinate the whole of Hellenism, had a new 
light thrown upon them. They appeared almost in the 
light of a necessary feature in that age. Sin and foulness 
it put far from itself. But otherwise it built itself up by 
aid of any element whatsoever that was still capable of 
vitality. ' ' 5 

Christianity has always affirmed its ability to save 
and purify the whole world and to satisfy the entire 
aspiration of man's higher nature, in his most enlight- 

5 A. Harnack, The Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries, Vol. i, 
p. 145. 


ened state ; and herein lies its superiority over other reli- 
gions, and its legitimate right to establish itself in all 
the world. Its content of all moral truth and ability to 
supply all human need justify its right to be the only 
universal religion. 

Christ frequently foreshadowed the universality of 
His kingdom, and incidentally revealed the future recog- 
nition of the Gentile seekers after God. He gave offence 
to the Jews when He reminded them that there were 
many widows in Israel, but Elijah was sent to become 
the guest of none save the Gentile widow of Zarephath, 
and that there were many lepers in Israel in the time of 
Elisha, but that none of them was cleansed but Naaman 
the Syrian, (Luke 4:25-27). He also gave prominence to 
the human character and spiritual capacity of aliens, for 
out of the ten lepers healed, the one who returned to give 
thanks, was a Samaritan, (Luke 17:17); and it was a 
Samaritan who showed mercy to the man who had fallen 
among thieves, (Luke 10:33). He hesitated not to con- 
demn the nationalism of His time, as to the place of wor- 
ship, and intimated the replacing, in the Messianic age, 
of the temple service by a true and spiritual worship, 
(John 4:20-24). When the Roman Centurion besought 
Him to heal his servant, simply by His word, without 
visiting the house, He marvelled and said: "Verily I 
have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel;" and in 
recognition of that faith disclosed the universality of His 
kingdom, saying, "Many shall come from the east and 
the west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, 
and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven," (Matt. 8:5-11). 
There are other instances, where Jesus indicated that 
Christianity is for all mankind ; for He said, ' i Come unto 
me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will 
give you rest." (Matt. 11:28). "And I, if I be lifted up 
from the earth, will draw all men unto Myself," (John 
12:32). "All authority hath been given unto Me in 


heaven and on earth. Go ye therefore, and make dis- 
ciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name 
of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; 
teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I com- 
manded yon," (Matt. 28:19,20). Jesus transcended all 
racial and sectarian divisions when He said: "Whoso- 
ever shall do the will of My Father which is in heaven, 
the same is My brother, and sister, and mother," 
(Matt. 12:50; Acts 1:6-9). 

Peter who had associated with Christ, conceded at 
the house of Cornelius, that whatsoever is good in the 
non-Christian world is not adverse to Christianity, for 
' ' God is no respecter of persons : but in every nation he 
that feareth Him, and worketh righteousness, is accept- 
able to Him," (Acts 10 :34, 35). Without discounting the 
good, it is the purpose of God that Christianity shall 
supplement the confidence and hope which alien religions 
lack; so that to Jew and Gentile there shall be a new 
message and assurance, — the "preaching good tidings of 
peace by Jesus Christ, (He is Lord of all) " (Acts 10 :36). 
Paul also repeatedly voiced the universality of Christian- 
ity, and indicated that the task of the Church is so great 
that it can approve every influence that exalts the right 
and restrains the wrong. The agitation for Christian 
union in the present day appeals to the Church to restore 
its apostolicity, and hold to its program of one universal 
Church, to win the whole world for Christ. However 
short of realizing this end as yet, the Church aims at 
nothing less than the unification of all mankind in 
Jesus Christ, without the limitations of class, tribe, or 

All the great movements of the present day which 
seek to deepen and promote the religious spirit find 
Christian union an imperative necessity. The move- 
ment for the Federation of the Churches, the world's 
conferences, and the mutual division and assignment of 


missionary territories to various denominations leave no 
alternative for Protestant Churches but to unite as one 
organic Church. I have endeavored to foresee only the 
essential characterictics and spirit that should define 
such worthy and beneficent union. "A program liter- 
ally world-wide in its scope is indispensable to enrich 
and complete the Church. Jesus Christ must have all 
the races and all the nations, through which to make 
known fully his excellences and to communicate adequate- 
ly His power. Informed, transformed, enlightened, en- 
livened by the reception of Christ and the indwelling 
of the Holy Spirit, Asia, Africa, and Oceania will surely 
exercise a profound influence upon the "Western Church 
and help greatly to enlarge and enrich its conception of 
Christ and His Kingdom. " 6 

The Christian union spirit contemplates the elimina- 
tion of denominational differences, and the establish 
ment of one universal Church, for the betterment of 
its own life and fellowship, and also that the so-called 
Christian countries may have a more efficient and ex- 
emplary impress of the moral ideals of Christ, and that 
the non-Christian world may have a fair and abundant 
hearing of the whole saving message of the gospel. 

David Owen Thomas. 

"John R. Mott, The Decisive Hour of Christian Missions, p. 237, New York, 1910. 



By Alfred Williams Anthony, D.D., Executive Secretary of The Home 
Missions Council, New York City. 

One might say ' ' The Unifying Influence of Foreign Mis- 
sions," or "The Unifying Influence of the Gospel Mes- 
sage," or indeed "The Unifying Influence of Chris- 
tianity." Everything connected with the ministry and 
work of Jesus Christ is unifying, if those connected with 
it have the right spirit. There may be a divisive spirit 
in Home Missions, as, alas, that spirit of schism and 
strife has not been wanting in the church and her organi- 

The personal element is the important factor. Not 
the task upon which men are engaged, nor the organiza- 
tions with which they are connected, nor even the meth- 
ods which they may employ, determine whether the sum 
total of their influence is centrifugal, or centripetal; it 
is the spirit with which they work. In an irenic and 
conciliatory spirit they heal wounds, harmonize differ- 
ences, and unite factions in cooperation and combina- 
tion ; while, in an opposite spirit, if they themselves are 
ungenerous, illiberal, hostile, or simply critical and sus- 
picious, they create antagonisms, stir up strife, and fo- 
ment trouble. Even the Gospel of Jesus Christ has been 
used as a club by some men. 

But Home Mission work has many aspects of special 
reconciliation and union. In the first place it is not 
over against Foreign Missions ; it is a part of the world- 
commission, — win all men to Christ. If Foreign Mis- 
sions had been more perfect, they would have already 
prepared nations for their great migrations, and would 
be sending now to this country men of other lands al- 



ready converted to Christ. If Home Missions were 
more effective, they would already have accomplished a 
large portion of the work of Foreign Missions by re- 
turning to their native lands millions of men who, while 
sojourners in America, had become disciples of Jesus 
Christ, and returned as His missionaries. 

Home Missions call for the cooperation, not only of 
the missionary boards of the different denominations, but 
of the denominations themselves, and of all their organi- 
zations and allied societies. The task breaks down, on 
the western plains, and in the dense cities, and in all the 
varied forms of American life and interests, if the forces 
of the Church are indifferent to each other or oppose 
each other. They must cooperate. They have learned 
this not as a dogma, but out of experience. The Federal 
Council of Churches, and the Home Missions Council, 
both coming into organized existence in 1908, are frank 
acknowledgments that here in the United States of 
America the Church fails, unless she has fellowship 
amongst her own parts, and possesses the spirit of unity. 

The Home Mission task has such variety of material 
to work upon, and of objects to secure, that it cannot be 
carried out successfully by any one body of Christians,, 
but requires them all in accord and cooperation. The 
North American Indians have a claim upon the Chris- 
tian Church, too tardily and too scantily acknowledged. 
The immigrants, threatening at times all our bulwarks of 
safety, present a jargon of appeals and a babel of op- 
portunities. The negro, whether south, or migrating 
north, presents urgent necessities for education and 
guidance, industrially, politically and socially. There 
are slums in great American cities more pagan than the 
Desert of Sahara, and there are isolated hamlets even 
in old New England more lonely than Tierra del Fuego. 

The fact that after so many centuries of endeavor 
the Church still has so large a portion of the earth un- 


conquered is clear evidence that the methods of separa- 
tion and strife are a failure. As allies the churches of 
Christ must have some form of coalition cabinet, some 
general staff of strategy and direction. 

The Home Missions Council has been created for the 
purpose of coordinating and harmonizing the missionary 
endeavors in America and its dependencies of all 
branches of the Christian Church. It exercises no lord- 
ship; it has no desire for domination. It is a council; 
it possesses the spirit of fellowship and good will. 

At its last annual meeting, held in New York City 
January 15-17, 1918, the Home Missions Council uttered 
two opportune and significant appeals which have not 
as yet been widely circulated, nor have received the at- 
tention they deserve. The first is entitled "An Appeal 
From The Home Missions Council To The Nation's Re- 
ligious Forces For Cooperative Efficiency," and reads 
as follows: — 

The Home Missions Council, an Association of de- 
nominational home mission and Church extension boards 
and societies in the United States of America, is pro- 
foundly conscious of the great spiritual issues involved 
in the present world-crisis. While its relations even 
to its constituent bodies are purely advisory it feels im- 
pelled to present for the earnest consideration of all 
home mission and Church extension agencies, national, 
state, district, city and local, the following urgent ap- 

The American spiritual fabric is under severe strain. 
Every department of our life has been loyally devoted 
to seeing the announced national program through 
to the insurance of a world made safe for democracy 
and to the abolition of war as a means of settling inter- 
national differences. This is an enterprise too urgent to 
admit of indifference on the part of any of the nation's 
religious agencies, and so holy as to call forth the utmost 
religious devotion of a consecrated people. 

Under this strain every department of our life is 
compelled to make readjustments, some to be temporary 


In meeting the immediate and passing emergency and 
some manifestly to be permanent. This demand for re- 
adjustment extends, indeed, to intimacies of the per- 
sonal life. Food programs are affected in every house- 
hold and in the experience of each individual. The 
closest ties of the home are being broken and the fondest 
and purest personal attachments torn asunder. The 
industrial organization is adopting radical measures not 
previously deemed tolerable or possible. Private and 
group interests are yielding to larger national and world 

Every prompting of loyalty to the high and holy 
purpose which engage the nation, and every expectation 
of those who morally and financially support the pro- 
gram of the Churches, require that our missionary agen- 
cies shall joyfully and intelligently yield a similar al- 
legiance. We must economize in money and in men for 
the sake of that spiritual integrity without which the 
nation must stand impotent before its great task. Noth- 
ing must be permitted to reduce the spiritual efficiency 
of the national life. The task committed to the Churches 
must be prosecuted with a vigor and intelligence not hith- 
erto known. Their work must become more extensive 
and intensive everywhere. For this reason the reproach 
of overlapping and duplication of money and leader- 
ship must be removed. Our efforts of recent years to 
achieve this must be redoubled and all remaining in- 
stances of waste resolutely eliminated. Only so can the 
confidence of a people under the present great strain 
be preserved and the Churches advanced to that effi- 
ciency which will make them equal to their responsibili- 

We therefore urgently appeal to the people in all 
home mission charges to practice those economies in 
their religious organization which are required of our 
society in every other department, to merge their groups 
in worship and community work, to save fuel when it 
may be possible by uniting congregations, to release for 
other forms of national and community service one or 
more of the ministers in overlapping parishes, to utilize 
emergency inter-church committees for the regular min- 
istry of the Churches and to project new plans of inter- 


church community service, to release unused Church 
property by sale or for temporary employment, as may 
be required, to utilize all Church buildings so far as 
practicable for continuous week-through service in tem- 
porary or permanent community enterprises, and in ev- 
ery other manner to conserve Church resources and 
strengthen by cooperation the Church's programs. 

We appeal to all local, district, state and regional 
denominational committees, societies and boards respon- 
sible for the dispensing of home mission funds to reach 
agreements with agencies of other denominations oper- 
ating in the same territory by which all duplications of 
money aid in the same community shall be rigidly 
eliminated and workers shall be utilized for unhampered 
community work, no energies and resources being 
wasted by sectarian competition or duplication. 

We appeal to all Churches located in rural com- 
munities, and to agencies aiding by money grants or 
other assistance in such communities, to institute and 
zealously to prosecute plans for the conservation of 
food and the quickening of production, inspiring our 
rural populations with the sense of the holy task into 
which the national mission in the world has called them. 

We appeal to all Churches and missions ministering 
to communities, or individuals employing alien speech 
and otherwise detached from our common American 
life and its purposes, and to all agencies aiding such 
Churches and missions by money or leadership, to re- 
double their efforts in a new and holier sympathy by 
way of extending the common use of our common lan- 
guage and an appreciation of those historic and for- 
ward-looking purposes which have made this nation 
what it is and have prepared it for this critical hour. 

We appeal to all national boards and societies ad- 
ministering home mission funds to scrutinize their fiscal 
budgets with new zeal, to institute closer conference be- 
tween one another in the organization of schedules of 
money grants and by every means practicable to see 
that their funds are not duplicated in aided communities 
or otherwise unwisely employed in aid of mission work^ 
We urge them to organize all available forces under 
cooperative programs to help the nation meet the pres- 
ent emergency and to seek through the fiery trial of this> 


world crisis those providential lessons designed to in- 
spire a new ministry of reconciliation, a new and wider 
cooperative program among religious forces, and a new 
conception and realization of the Kingdom of Heaven 
on Earth. 

The second appeal is entitled "An Appeal for Per- 
sonal Consecration." It is: — 

The purpose of the Home Missions Council being 
cooperation, its utterances naturally emphasize collec- 
tive activities. At the present hour cooperation is in the 
foreground of thought even on an international scale. 
A chief issue of the world struggle is to be the coopera- 
tion of all mankind. We hope that the hour is swiftly 
passing when an exclusively individualistic interpreta- 
tion of the Gospel can be cherished by any one. It is 
forever past with us. 

At this particular juncture it is fitting that we place 
on the record also as one of our primary convictions 
the belief that personality, divine and human, is the 
corner stone of society. A fundamental factor, there- 
fore, in world reconstruction is personal regeneration. 

We therefore appeal to all missionaries, all adminis- 
trators of missions and all Christian forces to seek with 
redoubled energy for the production of personal loyalty 
to God and man. We call upon all men, men in the 
trenches, men in the industries, men in all places of 
power, to give their hearts to God and their hands to 
their fellows in utter, unstinted personal devotion. 

These appeals have no sectarian bias. They are to 
Christians everywhere, and of every kind. They are 
suited to America and to the world. If ever our nation, 
and the nations of the world, were learning that civiliza- 
tion without the spirit of Jesus Christ is inadequate for 
human welfare and the preservation of the institutions 
of civilization and government, we are learning it now; 
and with a new and deeper consecration as a united 
people we need to draw near to the throne of grace and 
renew our strength for a fresh dedication to the mis- 
sionary tasks, unto which the Church universal has been 
called. Alfred Williams Anthony. 


By Paul de Schweinitz, D.D., Vice President of the Executive Board of 
the Moravian Church in America, Bethlehem, Pa. 

The overture of the General Assembly of the Presby- 
terian Church in the United States of America of May, 
1918, to the other Churches of our country to consider 
the feasibility of an organic union of the Evangelical 
Churches of the United States has brought the discus- 
sions about Church unity out of the clouds down to 
earth and has placed before the Churches a concrete 
proposition, which is at least within the range of pos- 
sibility, and which must be faced. 

While the ideals actuating the proposed World Con- 
ference on Faith and Order as inaugurated by the Gen- 
eral Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church of 
1910 naturally appeal strongly to all, who have the unity 
of the Church of Christ at heart, yet up to the present 
time nothing that can really be deemed practical has 
resulted, and the proposed mode of procedure is so in- 
volved and cumbersome, that the ordinary man cannot 
retain its features in memory. The leaders of the 
World Conference on Faith and Order are apparently 
more concerned with finding a means of reunion with 
Roman Catholicism and the ancient Churches of the 
East than with the more modern Evangelical Churches. 
The possibility of reunion with Eoman Catholicism is 
so remote, that to make that a determining factor in 
the movement dooms it to failure for an indefinite time 
to come. Nor is such a renuion to be desired until there 
has been a radical change in these Churches. It is easy 



to talk glibly of the ' i sin of schism, ' ' but the Evangelical 
Churches of the world cannot deny their faith, for 
which their fathers died, for the sake of an outward 
reunion with a Church, that boasts, that it has not 
changed. Nor can they characterize the great reform- 
atory movements of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries 
as sinful. 

Unless the proposed World Conference on Faith and 
Order is willing to proceed without the official coopera- 
tion of the Roman Catholic Church it may as well be 
abandoned for an indefinite time. 

The Presbyterian overture for an organic union of 
the Evangelical Churches of the United States, on the 
other hand, brings the whole matter into the region of 
the practical, and it can soon be determined, which 
Churches consider themselves evangelical, and which 
are sincere in their desire to bring about organic unity. 

Much has been written on the subject of Church unity 
during the past decade and every writer professes ear- 
nestly to desire it, but yet every writer is exceedingly 
careful to avoid saying how it is to be brought about or 
to formulate any practical, definite, concrete, plan or 
mode of procedure. The impression is almost made by 
this mass of literature, that the chief obstacles to any- 
thing practical in an approach to actual Church unity 
are those who profess to be most eager to bring it about ! 
There is another growing feeling and that is this: 
If the whole matter could be left in the hands of the 
laity with power to act, without the theoretical and 
technical objections of the clergy, the desired end could 
be attained! 

When it comes to the point of actual organic union, 
there will necessarily be a very large number of in- 
tricate questions to be solved in the matter of adjusting 
governmental methods, administrative policies, corpo- 
rate rights, funded investments and the like, but if spir- 


itual unity is attained, all these external matters can 
eventually be adjusted. 

Out of the mass of literature on the subject of Church 
reunion emerge two outstanding difficulties: — the rec- 
onciling of divergent views about the Sacraments and 
the Priesthood, or still more concretely expressed, — 
about baptism and ordination. As baptism admits to 
participation in the Holy Communion of the Lord's Sup- 
per, because it admits to membership in the Church of 
Christ, if agreement on the subject of baptism can be 
reached a great step forward will have been taken. 

Without entering upon any doctrinal discussion at 
all, will it in any way be helpful to relate how the Mo- 
ravian Church has handled this question practically? 
The Moravian Church practises infant baptism, because 
it teaches that an infant is an heir of eternal life, not 
because of its innate innocence or sinlessness, but solely 
and alone because it has been redeemed by the vicarious 
death of Christ. This being so, on the ground of the faith 
of the Church and of the child's parents or sponsors, it 
holds that the child is entitled to the outward sign of 
this redemption and being thus baptized into the death 
of Jesus become a member of His visible Church. Then 
in riper years by virtue of his own faith the child, now 
grown to years of understanding, confirms the covenant, 
into which his baptism in infancy placed him, and by the 
rite of confirmation is admitted to the Sacrament of the 
Lord's Supper. At the same time the Moravian Church 
admits to the Lord's Supper those who were not bap- 
tized in infancy, but only as adults on confession of 
faith, without confirmation. As regards method, the 
iMoravian Church as a rule administers the Sacrament 
of baptism by affusion or effusion (pouring or sprin- 
kling the water on the head), but if the adult candidate 
conscientiously desires immersion, this is specifically 
permitted and provided for (cf. The Book of Order of 


the Moravian Church, page 124 :4, Edition of 1911). Thus 
it has for years handled this question of baptism prac- 
tically, and baptism is no obstacle to Church union as 
far as the Moravian Church is concerned. 

As far as the Sacrament of the Holy Communion of 
the Lord's Supper is concerned, the Moravian Church 
has officially maintained unaltered the position assumed 
461 years ago, to wit : — that it declined to set up any doc- 
trinal interpretation of the Sacrament and accepts the 
words of institution as given in the Gospels and in First 
Corinthians without any human interpretation what- 
soever — that is without requiring anyone to subscribe to 
any creedal interpretation. It admits to its Lord's Sup- 
per gladly, willingly, cordially, anyone and everyone 
who would be admitted to the Lord's Table in his own 
church. So much for the attitude of the Moravian 
Church towards the Sacraments. 

Possibly a word on the subject of ordination may be 
helpful or at least interesting. The Moravian Church 
holds the Historic Episcopate as a precious treasure. 
All its clergy are episcopally ordained. So highly did 
it value the Historic Episcopate, that all through the 
dreadful years of the Thirty Years' War and the Anti- 
Reformation under Ferdinand II of Austria, at tremen- 
dous sacrifice and under terrible persecutions, it per- 
petuated its episcopate, consecrating bishops in spent 
contra spent, even when its dioceses were totally de- 
stroyed and there were not even parishes existing, just 
in order to keep up the succession, in the hope that the 
Church would be renewed. And thus it came about, that 
in 1735 the episcopate was transferred from the sur- 
viving bishops of the Ancient Bohemian-Moravian 
Brethren to the Renewed Brethren's or Moravian 
Church, and the succession has been kept intact ever 
since. And thus it came about that on May 12th, 1749, 
after careful examination, the British Parliament by a 


special Act, the House of Lords, including the Bishops 
of the Established Church, concurring, declared the 
Moravian Church to be an Ancient Episcopal Church. 

None the less the Moravian Church has always ac- 
knowledged the ministry of all other Churches, has fra- 
ternized with them unreservedly, admitted them to its 
pulpits on a perfect equality, and accepts the unques- 
tioned validity of all their functions. Having the His- 
toric Episcopate it naturally maintains the three or- 
ders of the ministry: deacons, presbyters (priests) and 
bishops. When a candidate for Holy Orders is ordained 
a deacon he is thereby endued with the right to admin- 
ister the sacraments, solemnize matrimony, as well as 
engage in the ordinary functions of the ordained min- 
istry. After he has approved himself as a deacon, 
usually after a testing period of at least two years, he 
is advanced to the second order of the ministry and is 
ordained a presbyter and is available for more impor- 
tant positions in the Church. Consecration to the epis- 
copate naturally follows only upon election to this office. 

Now this is the way the Moravian Church handles 
the question of a brother, who has been ordained in a 
Church, which has not the Historic Episcopate and 
which does not observe the three orders of the ministry. 
It does not for a moment question his ordination. If he 
desires to enter the ministry of the Moravian Church 
he is received, other things and his credentials being 
satisfactory, without reordination,'. He has been or- 
dained once and so he is received as a deacon on exactly 
the same footing as any deacon ordained in the Mora- 
vian Church. Then after he has approved himself in the 
Moravian ministry for two or more years he is advanced 
to the second order of the ministry, just as any Mora- 
vian deacon would be, and ordained a presbyter by a 
Moravian bishop. Thus the episcopal ministry is main- 
tained, and yet no disregard of the orders of a sister 


Church is shown. A bishop of the Protestant Episcopal 
Church, beloved by a wide circle outside of his own com- 
munion, expressed himself as considering this a very 
happy and very practical solution of a much vexed ques- 
tion. All this is set forth in detail in the Book of Order 
of the Moravian Church, Edition of 1911, page 57 :8. 

Hence the question of the Priesthood or of ordina- 
tion is no obstacle to Church union as far as the Mora- 
vian Church is concerned. 

The Moravian Church, no more than any other at 
this time, has no worked-out plan for organic Church 
union to submit, but it was thought that this relation 
of how it has been handling these puzzling questions 
of the Sacraments and Ordination might throw a side- 
light on the prevailing discussions and thus prove of in- 
terest and possibly of value. 

Paul de Schweinitz. 


By Robert H. Gardiner, Secretary of the Protestant Episcopal Commission 
on the World Conference on Faith and Order, Gardiner, Me. 

In the Khristianskaia My si ("Christian Thought'') of 
May-June, 1917, published at Kiev, Russia, is an inter- 
esting series of articles on the World Conference on 
Faith and Order. The editor quotes at some length from 
a letter from the secretary of the Commission of the 
Episcopal Church on the World Conference on Faith 
and Order, enclosing the principal publications by that 
commission, and pointing out that the sole basis for 
reunion is the Incarnation as the central point of Chris- 
tian doctrine and Christian life, the bond which unites 
all the Churches, whatever differences there may be on 
other questions of doctrine or of Order. The letter 
pointed out that several Russian Church reviews notably 
Viera i Razum, Tserkovnii Viestnik and Tserkovniia 
Viedomosti had published sympathetic articles on the 
World Conference, and suggested a review of the World 
Conference publications by the Khristianskaia My si. 
These articles are in reply to that request. Their sub- 
stance is as follows : 

The idea of the union of all Christian Churches is not 
only a bright dream in the consciousness of the faithful ; 
it is also a need of that consciousness, it is an object 
of our prayers. In all the Orthodox Churches at every 
divine service prayers are offered for the peace of the 
whole world, for the welfare of all the holy Churches of 
God, and the union of all. There is not a single Chris- 
tian Church adoring Jesus Christ our Lord, in whose 
liturgy similar prayers do not reecho. The great ma- 
jority of the faithful piously repeat the words of the 
prayer without paying attention in the depths of their 



souls to its contents. Others with full sincerity con- 
sciously pray for a fulfilment of the promise of the 
Saviour that all may be one, but they merely await the 
fulfilment of Christ's prayer without their participation. 
A very few feel themselves bound not only to pray, but 
to work in order to hasten the hour of that reunion. 

Many attempts have been made to reach that goal, 
but the separated Christian Churches still stand isolated. 
The majority of the faithful look upon the members of 
another denomination as aliens and almost foes, as if 
they did not bow before one and the same Lord, as if they 
were not members of one and the same Body of Christ. 

But the yearning for union, the consciousness of the 
wrongfulness of separation, never dies away in the 
hearts of the faithful, and attempts for Christian reunion 
have constantly been made. In our day we witness such 
an effort, but nobler than all of those of the past. It will 
seem strange to our Russian people that this initiative is 
American. We are accustomed to look upon Americans 
as being men entirely occupied in practical activities. 
We have regarded them as men living a weak spiritual 
and religious life, and we were perplexed by the details 
which reached us of their religious movements, for in- 
stance, the Student Christian Federation, the new reli- 
gious societies, the numerous theological works, and fi- 
nally, the new plan of summoning a conference for the ex- 
amination of the problem of the reunion of the churches ; 
a conference, according to the expression of the Ameri- 
can Bishop Anderson, which will be neither pan-Protes- 
tant nor pan-Catholic, but pan- Christian ; a universal 
conference in which all Christendom will be represented, 
but which will have no right to make laws or resolu- 
tions binding upon the Churches taking part in it 

Then the editors give an account of the progress of 
the movement since the General Convention of the 
American Episcopal Church in Cincinnati in October, 
1910, and quote the report of the committee recommend- 
ing the calling of the conference, as follows : 

"Your committee is of one mind. We believe that 
the time has now arrived when representatives of the 
whole family of Christ, led by the Holy Spirit, may be 


willing to come together for the consideration of ques- 
tions of Faith and Order. We believe, further, that all 
Christian Communions are in accord with us in our desire 
to lay aside self-will and to put on the mind which is in 
Christ Jesus our Lord. We would heed this call of the 
Spirit of God in all lowliness, and with singleness of 
purpose. We would place ourselves by the side of our 
fellow-Christians, looking not only on our own things, 
but also on the things of others, convinced that our one 
hope of mutual understanding is in taking personal coun- 
sel together in the spirit of love and forbearance. It is 
our conviction that such a conference for the purpose of 
study and discussion, without power to legislate or to 
adopt resolutions, is the next step toward unity. 

' ' With grief for our aloofness in the past, and for 
other faults of pride and self-sufficiency, which make for 
schism; with loyalty to the truth as we see it, and with 
respect for the convictions of those who differ from us ; 
holding the belief that the beginnings of unity are to be 
found in the clear statement and full consideration of 
those things in which we differ, as well as of those things 
in which we are at one, we respectfully submit the follow- 
ing resolution .... That a Joint Commission be 
appointed to bring about a conference for the considera- 
tion of questions touching Faith and Order, and that all 
Christian Communions throughout the world which con- 
fess our Lord Jesus Christ as God and Saviour be asked 
to unite with us in arranging for and conducting such a 

Then the Khristianskaia Mysl reports the further 
progress of the movement and quotes as follows from the 
appeal for a Truce of God issued by the Advisory Com- 
mittee in 1914 : 

"We believe in the one people of God throughout the 
world. We believe that now is a critically hopeful time 
for the world to become Christian. We believe that the 
present world-problems of Christianity call for a world 
conference of Christians .... We hope that ere 
long its world-wide representative character will be 
established beyond peradventure. In the work of prep- 
aration for its convening we have no authority or desire 


to enter into a discussion of the important questions 
which the conference itself will meet to consider . . . 
The love of Christ for the world constrains us to ask you 
to join with us and with His disciples of every name in 
proclaiming among the Churches throughout Christen- 
dom a Truce of God. Let the questions that have 
troubled us be fairly and clearly stated. Let scholars, 
Catholic and Protestant, give freely to the people what- 
ever light from their historical studies they can throw 
over these subjects. More than that, it is of essential im- 
portance for us to seek to understand what in the reli- 
gious experience of others are the things of real value 
which they would not lose, and which should be conserved 
in the one household of faith. We pray also that each 
Christian communion may avoid, so far as possible, any 
controversial declaration of its own position in relation 
to others, but rather that all things be said and done as if 
in preparation for the coming together of faithful dis- 
ciples from every nation and tongue to implore a fresh 
outpouring of God's Holy Spirit. Before all indifference 
doubt, misgivings, we would hold up the belief that the 
Lord's prayer for the oneness of His disciples was in- 
tended to be fulfilled ; and that it ought not to be impos- 
sible in the comprehension of the Church, as it is prac- 
ticable in the State, for men of various temperaments 
and divergent convictions to dwell together on agreed 
principles of unity. We would therefore urge all who 
hold positions of leadership or authority in the Church to 
labor without ceasing to work out in this generation by 
mutual recognition and possible readjustments, a prac- 
tical basis of unity in liberty, in order, in truth, in power, 
and in peace. ' ' 

After further particulars as to the number of pam- 
phlets printed and circulated by the Episcopal Commis- 
sion, and the number of commissions appointed through- 
out the world, and the correspondence with Cardinal 
Gasparri and with distinguished members of other Com- 
munions, the article continues : — 

' ' Mankind dying in carnage, a Christianity which has 
lost its way, are loudly crying: How long, Lord, how 
long shall we wait until peace be established between 


nations and unity among the Churches! Nobody dares 
deny his share of guilt in what is happening. And in the 
face of world events and religious conditions, could any 
Christian decline the appeal to participate in this move- 
ment; which is full of mutual confidence and hope, and 
loyalty to Christ and His Church?" 

The conclusion of the articles is as follows : 

"What is to be thought of the World Conference pro- 
posal, depends essentially upon how the present sepa- 
ration of the churches is to be regarded. That is the fun- 
damental question. If every church, in spite of her 
possible errors and the imperfections of the organization 
of her life, does not cease to have Jesus Christ as her 
Head, and appears as a part of His Body, the Universal 
Church, then, indeed, a glorious opportunity is present 
to the World Conference to serve the cause of the real 
reunion of the Churches by means of the penetration of 
their life with the spirit of mutual love, esteem, and 
readiness to acknowledge both the common limitations as 
to the embodiment of truth, and the possibility of a 
gradual enlightenment of the several Communions with 
regard to the One Body. But if we hold that among 
the separated Churches one only is the true Church in 
its fullness and purity, and that the other Churches 
appear as alterers of the truth, and for this reason as 
having lost their communion with Christ, then it is clear 
that there may be question not of the reunion of the 
Churches, but of their union with the Church. If every 
ecclesiastical Communion should adhere to such a view, 
that she herself is the only true Church in the world, then 
it would be difficult to entertain hope of the usefulness of 
reapproachment and mutual acquaintance of the repre- 
sentatives of the different Churches. But such a re- 
approachment might be a way to shake the strong convic- 
tion of the absolute possession of truth on the part of 
one's own Church. 

"The success of the World Conference will depend 
almost entirely upon how deeply the idea of the unity 
in diversity of the universal Church has penetrated 
Christian minds, and how much the initiative of the 
World Conference contributes to the prevalence of a 
larger tolerance, and to the acceptance by the ecclesias- 


tical consciousness of the idea of the universality of the 
Church in the midst of the diversity of Christian confes- 
sions. In any case, the World Conference will put before 
the Christian world that fundamental question about 
the Church which we have formulated above. If the 
seriousness and complexity of the question do not allow 
us to solve it now, and if we think no individual can 
answer it, yet the same question stands before every 
Church and every Communion, and claims an answer 
with a vital urgency. ' ' 

Eobert H. Gardiner. 


[At a meeting of the National Missionary Council in India held in 
November 1917, it was decided that in each Representative Council area 
different arrangements should be made for the observance of the Octave 
of Prayer for unity in January, 1918, according to the conditions in each 

In Bombay it was arranged that each congregation should be urged 
to meet every day in the week for meditation and prayer. A general 
meeting of the clergy in the city was called together to discuss this 
and other plans, at which it was arranged that throughout the Week 
the Church of the United Free Church of Scotland and the Hume Memorial 
Church of the American Marathi Mission should each be open for an hour 
on each day, as places where Christians of every denomination could meet 
for silent prayer and meditation. It was further arranged that a joint 
meeting for prayer should be held in the Church of England Cathedral 
at the close of the Week. 

The following leaflet was an adaptation and modification of outlines 
prepared by the Anglican Bishop of Madras at the request of the National 
Missionary Council. 

The joint meeting in the Anglican Cathedral was held on the day after 
the close of the Week, because Saturday afternoon was considered the best 

A small Committee, with the Bishop of Bombay as Chairman, was 
appointed by the Bombay Eepresentative Council of Missions, to draw 
up a form of service which was printed in English, Marathi, Gujarati 
and Urdu. The only reason why it was not printed in Tamil was be- 
cause there was no Tamil press in Bombay. 

The passages of Scripture at that service were read, first, in English 
by the Anglican Bishop of Bombay, then in Marathi, by a missionary 
of the American Marathi Mission, then in Gujarati by a missionary of 
the Irish Presbyterian Mission. 

The hymns chosen were those of which translations existed in all 
four of the Indian languages, so that each could join in the singing 
in his own tongue. 

The Cathedral was filled, which meant that there were between seven 
and eight hundred people of all denominations and races. — This is fur- 
nished by the courtesy of Mr. Eobert H. Gardiner, Secretary of the World 
Conference on Faith and Order, Gardiner, Me. — Editor.] 

I. — Friday, January 18th, 1918 

The Unity of God, as the Source and Model of the 
Unity of the Church 

"When our Lord Jesus Christ prayed that all Chris- 
tians might be one, He used these words ; * ' that they may 
all be one; even as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in 
Thee, that they also may be in Us; that the world may 



believe that Thou didst send Me. And the glory which 
Thou has given Me I have given unto them, that they 
may be one, even as We are one. ' ' — John xvii. 21-22 ; cp. 
v. 2.) 

So let us begin our week of prayer by meditating 
upon this pattern of unity which Jesus Christ has given 
us, namely the unity of God. 

1. — God is Three Persons in One 

Lift up your heart to God, thinking of His beauty, 
glory and power. Join with the Angels in worshiping 
Him, and say as carefully and reverently as you can. 

Holy, Holy, Holy ! Lord God Almighty ! 
Early in the morning our song shall rise to Thee : 
Holy, Holy, Holy ! Merciful and Mighty ! 
God in Three Persons, Blessed Trinity! 

Holy, Holy, Holy ! all the saints adore Thee, 
Casting down their golden crowns around the 

glassy sea; 
Cherubim and seraphim falling down before Thee, 
Which wert, and art, and evermore shall be. 

Holy, Holy, Holy ! though the darkness hide Thee, 
Though the eye of sinful man Thy glory may not 

Only Thou art Holy, there is none beside Thee 
Perfect in power, in love, and purity. 

Holy, Holy, Holy ! Lord God Almighty ! 

All Thy works shall praise Thy Name, in earth, 

and sky, and sea; 
Holy, Holy, Holy! Merciful and Mighty! 
God in Three Persons, Blessed Trinity! 

Think how differently you and other Christians 
would behave and think if you always remembered this 


holiness of God and more often stilled your hearts and 
minds to worship and adore Him. 

Pray for more constant recollection of Him, and for 
a deeper sense of His holiness and of His nearness. 

Say verse 3 of the hymn again. 

2.< — The Love that makes Him One is shining upon us 

and gives Life to us 

Think how the light of the sun, which gives joy and 
beauty to the whole world, is made up of the seven differ- 
ent colored lights which are seen in the rainbow. 

So the glory of God is the glory of one who is not one 
person but three persons. The Father, the Son and the 
Holy Spirit are one in perfect love. 

The God whom we worship, only exists because He is 
living this life or perfect love, being three persons held 
together by love. 

Think how hard this is for us to comprehend; but 
just as we feel the warmth of the sun and rejoice in 
its light, so we do feel the love of God in our lives, and 
can believe that it has its source in, and streams from the 
union of the three persons of the Blessed Trinity. 

Say "0 God, Three Persons in perfect unity, 
burning and shining with the love which makes 
Thee one, I worship and adore Thee." 

3. — This Love is meant to make us One, that we may 

shine unto the World 

Think how Christ prayed that as He and the Father 
are one so all Christians might be one in Him. 

Think how that if this were so we should all unite to 
make one bright light shining upon this earth; a light 
far brighter and stronger than the light of the sun. 

Think how people, who now live in the darkness of 
sin, could not fail to feel this light shining upon them 
and warming their hearts. 


Pray to God for the fulfilment of Christ's prayer. 

Pray that this week of prayer may help greatly to- 
wards it. 

Pray that our own prayers may be accepted and 
used to this end. 

Say ' i God, three persons in perfect unity, 
burning and shining with the love which makes 
Thee one, I worship and adore Thee. 
Give us Thy love to make us one, 
Make us to burn and shine with love, 
May our love bring light to the world, 
and reveal Thee to all as Holy, Holy, Holy, 
the source of light and love, 
the one true God." 

II. — Saturday, January 19th, 1918 
The Unity of Human Life in Christ 

Yesterday we began our week of prayer by meditat- 
ing upon the unity of God. To-day let us think how He 
made mankind in His own image, intending all men to 
be united and live together in love, as He is one in love. 

1. — Mankind meant to be one after the Likeness of God 

Begin by recalling yesterday's thoughts about the 
unity of God. God is three persons joined together in 
the union of perfect love. Then remember how God said 
"Let Us make man in Our own image, after Our like- 

This does not merely mean that each individual man 
is to be like God in his moral nature, knowing the differ- 
ence between right and wrong, and desiring goodness 
and love and happiness. 

It also means that "man," the whole human race, 
is meant to be held together in one common bond of love. 
Just as God is three persons in one, so the human race 


is meant to be many millions of persons held together 
by the power of love. 

2. — Therefore ive are Created Dependent upon one 


This explains why God has not created us so that 
each of us is independent of everyone else. He has made 
ns so that we have need of one another. 

Just as in the human body the hands need the feet 
and the eyes, etc., so in our ordinary social life we need 
other people. We need bakers, tailors, carpenters, etc., 
and each trade needs the other trades. 

If we quarrel with one another and do not help one 
another, then we all lose by it. What would happen if 
bakers would not bake for carpenters, and carpenters 
would not build for bakers ? Not only would both bakers 
and carpenters suffer, but everyone else also would suf- 

And it goes further than this, as the present war 
shows us. If nations quarrel with one another, then ev- 
erybody suffers most grievously; not only because we 
kill one another and waste one another's lands; but also 
because trade stops and we cease to share with one an- 
other the fruits of the earth. 

We can only have peace and happiness if we are 
willing to trust one another and to work for one another. 

Think of this and then say Psalm 133. 

Then say, 

' 'Oh God, three persons in one, 
Whose life is made perfect by love, 
Thou hast made us, one human race, in 

Thine image after Thy likeness ; 

We worship and adore Thee. 
Bind us together by perfect love, 


Take from us hatred and suspicion, sloth 

and selfishness, 
Make us ready to work for one another, 
For we all have need one of another. 
And most of all we have need of Thee, 

For we are Thy children, 

And Thou art our Father.' ' 

3. — The Church meant to restore the Unity of divided 


Now think how we have broken up and spoilt this 
brotherly unity which God intended us to have in our 
human life. 

Think of the effect of caste in India, with its separa- 
tion and hatred. 

Think of the wars of nations from earliest times, cul- 
minating in the present war. 

Christ came to bring peace, and to reconcile men to 
one another. 

For this purpose he founded His Church, that it 
might be the source and pattern of unity to all mankind. 
The Church was to be one, and as it grew and gathered 
in all the people of the earth, it was to make them one. 

But what has happened? Instead of remaining one 
the Church has itself become divided; and so not only 
is powerless to reconcile and unite mankind, but has 
actually become itself a new source of division. 

Think of the pity of this, and of how greatly the 
Church has failed in its mission owing to its divisions. 

Think of the divisions in India through the caste sys- 
tem. The Christians in India are freed from caste ; and 
they are meant to form a nucleus of a united India. But 
alas ! they are divided among themselves, and their work 
is only half being achieved. How different it would be 
if all the Christians in India were united in one living 


Again in the case of the war, how little the Church 
could do towards preventing it, and how little it can do 
now toward healing the breaches, because it is at war 
in itself! 

Ask God most humbly and penitently in the name of 
the whole Church for forgiveness for its sinful divisions, 
and for restoration to unity. 

Monday, January 21st, 1918 
The Unity of the Church in Christ 

Eecall Saturday's thoughts about the mission of the 
Church to restore unity to the world ; and consider that 
the Church ought to be able to do this because it is one 
body in Christ. "We are members of His body." 
(Ephesians v. 30). 

The Church is meant to live and to grow as one united 
living body, filled with one common life, and so to gather 
in all men and to bring them all to a new and perfect 

To-day let us consider how a body lives, and how all 
the various members of a body have their share in one 
common life, and let us pray God to teach us from this 
what the life of the Church ought to be. 

1. — The Cooperation of the various Members of the 


Think of the partnership of the members of the body. 
They have not all the same function. They do different 
work, and all share the results. 

Eead Corinthians xii. 12-27. 

The different members do different work, but they 
need the help of the other members if they are to do 
their own work properly. The eyes do not carry the 
body ; that is the work of the feet ; but the feet need the 
help of the eyes if they are to tread in the right place. 


So the eyes need the feet to take them to see places which 
at the moment are out of sight. Similarly the hands 
often cannot pick up a thing without the help of the 
eyes. And so on. 

Consider also that often different members of the 
body have to combine together in order that a man may 
properly understand and comprehend some thing or per- 
son. It takes sight, smell and touch all together to teach 
us the full beauty and wonder of a rose. We require 
to watch our friend's face as well as to hear his words, 
if we are fully to understand what is passing in his mind. 

Apply these thoughts to the Christian Church first 
in the matter of working together. One member or one 
community in the Church must do one work, others must 
do other work. But it all contributes to one end, and 
all share the result. Secondly, apply it in the matter 
of learning Christian truth. One sees the rose, one 
smells it, one feels it. Each apprehends a different as- 
pect of the same thing and what each apprehends in- 
creases the knowledge of the whole. Think what a man 
loses who has the sense of sight, but not of hearing or 
smell; and then think how one group in the Church is 
impoverished by being isolated from other groups which 
have different ways of apprehending spiritual truth. 

Pray God to make us more ready to cooperate to- 
gether, and to teach us how to do it. 

2. — Their mutual Care for one another 

Next think of the care of the different members of the 
body for one another. They all depend upon one an- 
other and so they all care for and serve each other. 
"Whether one member suffereth all the members suffer 
with it ; or one member is honoured, all the members re- 
joice with it." (1 Corinthians xii. 26.) 

So the eyes, hands and mouth combine in ministering 


to the body and in return the body supplies strength to 

Think how this principle ought to be working in the 
Church, causing us to love and care for our fellow Chris- 
tians, not only in spiritual things, but also in bodily 
needs. (1 Corinthians ix. 2.) 

Think how great a difference it would make, if this 
were more the case. How strong the body of Christ 
would become ; how quickly it would grow. 

Pray God to increase in us the spirit of mutual love 
and give us a greater sense of our need of one another. 

3. — Their Common Dependence on the Head 

Lastly consider that all the different members of the 
body work together because they are all controlled by the 
man's spirit, which directs them by means of the brain. 

So we who are members of Christ's body can only 
work together properly, if we are ruled and directed by 

That is why Scripture sometimes speaks of the whole 
body of the Church being Christ, as when it says "I 
am the Vine, ye are the branches" (John xv. 5). But 
also speaks of Christ as the head. 

Eead Ephesians i. 22 and iv. 15-16. 

A man is paralyzed when his members do not answer 
to the control of the brain. If only one member is thus 
paralysed, how greatly are all the other members ham- 

So if the Church is to be a truly living and growing 
body, not only must all the members cooperate together 
and care for each other, they must also answer to the 
control of the brain. Indeed it is only by attending to 
and obeying the head that they become conscious of one 
another's wants and able to supply them. 

Pray that we may grow in this loyalty to Christ's 


For all Thy Church, Lord, we intercede ; 
Make Thou our sad divisions soon to cease ; 
Draw us nearer each to each we plead, 
By drawing all to Thee, Prince of peace." 

IV.— Tuesday, January 22, 1918 

The Results of Disunion 

In our meditations so far we have considered the 
unity of God and how man was created that he might 
mirror that unity in his own social life. But man de- 
stroyed his unity and became divided through jealousy, 
suspicion and selfishness. Then God sent His Son to 
bring peace back into the world and to found His Church, 
which was to be the nucleus of a new unity for mankind. 
But the Church too has become divided and split up 
through the same faults, and so has failed to fulfil its 
mission and has sadly retarded God's purpose of 

Let us think to-day how grievous are the results of 
this spoiling of God's gracious work. 

1. — The Spoiling of Christ's Plan 

Consider first of all how that this disunion is not part 
of Christ's plan for His Church. He prayed "Holy 
Father keep them in Thy name which thou hast given 
Me, that they may be one, even as We are." (John xvii. 
2). He meant the unity of the Church to be something 
which should witness to the world. "That the world 
may believe that Thou didst send Me." (v. 21, cp. v. 23). 

Consider too how the Church started in this unity. 
"And the multitude of them that believed were of one 
heart and soul." (Acts iv. 32). And how the Apostles 
besought their converts to remain in this unity. "Ful- 
fil ye my joy, that ye be of the same mind, having the 
same love, being of one accord, of one mind ; doing noth- 


ing through faction or through vainglory, but in lowli- 
ness of mind each counting other better than himself.' ' 
(Philippians ii. 3). "Be ye all likeminded, compas- 
sionate, loving as brethren, tender hearted, humble- 
minded. (1 Peter iii. 8). (cp. Corinthians i, 10). 

But alas ! Think how different has been the history 
of the Church; think how different is what we see to- 

2. — The Sorrow caused to God 

Think next of the first great result of this disunion; 
namely the disappointment and sorrow which it causes to 
our Heavenly Father. 

Kead Isaiah v. 1-4. 

And mourn for the grief which our divisions have 
caused and are causing Him. 

Ask Him to open your eyes to see what He feels about 
this. Hear Him pleading with His Church, "0 my 
people, what have I done unto thee? and wherein have I 
wearied thee! testify against me." (Micah vi. 3). 

What are we to testify against Him? Whose fault is 
it, His or ours? 

Say, Lord God, Holy and Almighty, 

What can we testify against Thee? 
What more could have been done, that Thou hast 
not done? 
Wherefore have we brought forth wild grapes ? 
Lord God, Holy and Almighty. 

3. — The Loss of Power to work and witness 

Then consider the next great result of our divisions, 
namely the harm which it has caused to the followers 
of Christ. 

Think how much stronger in faith and in power to 
witness the Christians in this land would be, if they 


were one united body. Instead of that they are weak 
and scattered and perplexed. 

"My sheep wandered through all the mountains and 
upon every high hill ; yea, my sheep were scattered upon 
all the face of the earth." (Ezekiel xxxiv. 6). 

Think too of the scandal which our divisions have 
caused to so many, making some lose their faith, and pre- 
venting many other from accepting Christianity. 

Eemember Christ's solemn words "Who so shall cause 
one of these little ones which believe in me to stumble, 
it is profitable for him that a great millstone should 
be hanged about his neck, and that he should be sunk 
in the depth of the sea. ' ' (Matthew xviii. 6.) 

And think too how imperfectly and inefficiently, the 
Church does much of its work, for lack of co-operation. 
People who have gifts for evangelisation form one group 
and work in one place ; while those who are good at build- 
ing up and consolidating form another group and work 
in another place. Both are greatly the losers for their 
isolation. It is as though one army in the battle front 
were all cavalry, another all artillery, another all infan- 
try. Eecall in this connection yesterday's thoughts 
about the co-operation of different members of the body. 

Behold, then the divisions of our Church, causing 
grief to God and scandal to His flock. We are utterly 
helpless and can do nothing but pray Him to forgive and 
restore. And surely He will do this. 

Say with great faith and hope Psalm cxxx. 

V. — Wednesday, January 23, 1918 
The Causes of Disunion 

Yesterday we were thinking about the results of dis- 
union; what sorrow it causes to God and what harm it 
does to countless souls whom He loves. 

Recall how hateful a thing our disunion appeared to 
you yesterday, as you thought about its results. Pray 


God to increase your desire that all causes of it may be 
removed ; and ask Him to show you if any of the causes 
lurk in your own heart. 
Say again Psalm cxxx. 

1. — Pride and Vainglory 

Think how strange and horrible a thing it is that 
when Christians have disagreed about the truths of their 
religion, they have often done it in such a harsh and 
angry way, that they have cut themselves off from one 

It is indeed sometimes necessary to express disagree- 
ments about the truth clearly and firmly, as Saint Paul 
did to Saint Peter (Gralatians ii, 2) ; but even there we 
may "speak the truth in love." (Ephesians iv, 15.) 

What are the causes of the anger which so often 
spoils our contention for the truth? Are they not chiefly 
pride and vainglory? 

Pride is a fault of thought, leading us to trust our 
own judgment, and to think that we are right and others 
are wrong; so that we become impatient and angry if 
others contradict us or do not listen to us. 

Vainglory is a fault of desire ; leading us to want to 
be listened to and applauded by others; so that we be- 
come impatient and angry if others have more attention 
paid to them than we. 

Think what harm these faults have done in the his- 
tory of religion. What led the Pharisees and Sadducees 
to crucify Christ? 

Look into your own heart and ask yourself "Am I 
guilty of these faults in any matter ? If not in religious 
questions, in other matters? Am I doing my utmost 
to set an example of humility and gentleness ? ' ' 

Think again of St. Paul's words "Doing nothing 
through faction or through vainglory, but in lowliness of 


mind each counting other better than himself. ' ' (Philip- 
pians ii. 3.) 

What a beautiful ideal ! but how hard ! 

Say Psalm cxxxi. 

2. — Lack of Brotherliness and Friendliness 

Next consider that another common cause of divisions 
is mere misunderstanding ; and that this is often caused 
by lack of brotherliness and neighbourliness. It is be- 
cause men, do not care enough about one another to want 
to know about each other and to meet together and enter 
into one another's interests. If only they met and talked 
together, they would at once begin to see each other's 
good points, they would begin to respect one another 
and to understand one another, and they would both 
learn so much of the great truths which God wants to 
teach us. But just because they are of different race or 
caste or profession they remain apart ; or it may be mere- 
ly from laziness and selfishness. 

Think again how strange and horrible this is ! Men 
are partakers of the same bread and drink of the same 
Cup, and yet they do not care to know and to sympathize 
with and to understand those who worship with them in 
the same Church, still less Christians of other denomina- 

Am I such a one? Do I by my conduct help to foster 
this unreasonable and un- Christlike habit of not knowing 
my neighbour and of judging him from a distance instead 
of "taking sweet counsel together and walking with him 
in the house of God." — Psalm lv. 14). 

Say to yourself again and again "My brother for 
whom Christ died." 

3. — Indifference to the Unity that God Desires 

Lastly consider that the unity of the Church might 
never have been broken if Christians had cared about it 
and prayed about it as Christ does. Picture Him to 


yourself throughout the centuries praying His prayer 
for unity "Father, that they may be one, even as We 
are," and so few prayers rising from the earth to join 
with His before the Throne. Theologians, statesmen, 
Christians of all degree busy with their own schemes, 
seeking their own honour, sunk in their own selfish 
cares, and never pausing to lift up their hearts to the 
Father in quietness and faith and to embrace the whole 
world in love, as Christ did that night, and to pray the 
great prayer of unity: "Father, that we may all be 
one. ' ' 

Join now with Him in his prayer, as you behold Him 
pleading there in heaven. 

VI. — Thursday, January 24, 1918 

The Way of Return 

In our last meditation let us think of some of the 
simple things which we can all do to help on the work 
of restoring unity to the Church. 

1. — The Spirit of Service 

First of all, we can all get to know one another bet- 
ter. Little acts of kindness, little acts of neighbourli- 
ness ; we can all have a hand in these ; and how blessed 
are their fruits! 

"Is not this the fast which I have chosen ?***Is it 
not to deal thy bread to the hungry, and that thou bring 
the poor that are cast out to thy house? when thou seest 
the naked, that thou cover him; and that thou hide not 
thyself from thine own flesh?" (Isaiah lxviii. 6-7.) 

This was the way that Christ set about His work of 
bringing peace and reconciliation, "who went about do- 
ing good." (Acts x. 38.) 

"The Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but 
to minister." (Mark x. 45.) 


Think once more of St. Paul's description of the 
Chnrch as the body of Christ (1 Corinthians xii. 12), and 
of how this body cannot live and grow without thi& 
spirit of mutual service. 

Say to yourself "What can I do more than I do at 
present in the way of loving and serving my fellow 
Christians 1 ■ ' 

Ponder long upon Christ's example of service and 
pray for His love for yourself and all of us. 

2._ The Quest of Truth 

Consider next that love and brotherliness will not 
suffice alone to bring us into unity. We really do need 
to have our differences of opinion reconciled. This can 
only come by God leading us all on into fuller and clearer 
truth than we have at present. But if we believe in 
Him and pray to Him He is pledged to give this to us. 
For "truth," as well as grace, "came by Christ Jesus" 
(John i. 17) ; and He promised that His Holy Spirit shall 
guide us "into all the truth." (John xvi. 13). 

We may be sure that the Holy Spirit will yet do this 
for us, if only we will believe in Him, and wait upon 
Him with a humble and teachable spirit, and do not 
thwart Him by quarrelling among ourselves. 

Many Christians all over the world have been pre- 
paring since 1910 for a great conference in which the 
beliefs of the different Churches should be compared and 
considered. It is hoped that such a conference would 
show more clearly than we now realize how much actual 
agreement in belief there already is, and that it would 
also show exactly what are the points about which Chris- 
tians differ. By this greater clearness of understanding 
we might come to see that many times we differ because 
we have got hold of different aspects of truth, and have 
thought mistakenly that they are incompatible. It is 
possible that all those beliefs, which have meant very 


much to large numbers of men and women have in 
them a great measure of truth, and, if they were con- 
sidered with patience and without prejudice they might 
be seen to be parts of one great whole truth, and not 
contradictory and conflicting ideas. 

If this should prove to be the case, and Christians 
were all willing to confess that each section had been 
wrong in claiming the exclusive possession of truth, 
though it may have been, in the main, right about the 
particular truth, on which it laid special emphasis, then 
there would be opened up a new prospect of union based 
on truth. 

So pray God to-day especially to direct those who are 
preparing for this great conference, which is called The 
World Conference on Faith and Order, and to bless 
them, so that men may learn more about the truth and 
be drawn closer together in the truth. 

3. — Humility of Judgment and Willingness to Learn of 


This great work of preparing for and taking part in 
the World Conference on Faith and Order will fall chief- 
ly upon the more learned and clear-seeing people all 
over the world. But all of us ought to be helping to- 
wards it by being more eager to understand so much 
as we can of God's truth. 

So end by spending a few minutes in meditating 
about truth. Consider how Jesus Christ said "I am 
the Truth" (John xiv. 6,) and how Saint Paul speaks of 
"the truth as it is in Jesus" (Ephesians iv. 21). Truth 
really is not something written down. It is something 
alive in the mind of God and in the minds of people who 
have been taught of God. ' ' The word of God is living and 
active" (Hebrews iv. 12). The mind of God contains all 
truth and He sends out His Living Word to enable us 
men to know Him. Each one of us takes in a little 


of the mind of God, because the mind of each of us is so 

Think how little we really understand of the Bible; 
even of what we understand how little Ave act upon. 
This shows how unwilling we ought to be to say ".What 
I understand is all that matters. If a doctrine does not 
mean anything to me or help me, it is not important." 

Think again how often Jesus Christ said things which 
were nearly the opposite the one of the other. 

e.g. " He that is not with Me is against Me. ' ' 

(Matthew xii. 3). 
"He that is not against us is for us." 

(Mark ix. 40). 
or "I came not to judge the world." 

(John xii. 47). 
"For judgment I am come into the world." 

(John ix. 39). 

If we insisted on believing only one of such pairs of 
sayings, we should not get the whole truth "as it is in 
Jesus." Think whether some of the divisions are not 
caused by one set of Christians taking a bit of the truth 
as it is in Jesus and saying that that is all the truth, and 
another set taking another bit of the truth and saying 
that that is all the truth. 

Again meditate quietly for a moment on the mind of 
God ; how inexhaustible it is ! Even in the case of men 
we cannot fathom all the depths of their minds. We are 
always feeling that we have yet more to learn from our 
wisest friends. When something new or startling oc- 
curs, we want to go and talk to them about it, because 
we know that they will have something new to tell us 
about it, some fresh treasure of wisdom to give us. How 
infinitely more so must this be in the case of God! 

Ask Him then to make us very humble about our own 
knowledge of Him, and very desirous of increasing it. 


Adore Him because He teaches all the different men 
and women in the world according to their needs and 
capacities, and rejoice that He shews to some what He 
does not shew to us. 

Ask Him to make us willing to learn from others what 
He has taught them, as well as to teach others what He 
has taught us. 

Say most humbly, reverently and thankfully, Eomans 
xi. 33-36 and remember that Jesus Christ said to those 
who had believed Him ' ' If ye abide in My word, then are 
ye truly My disciples ; and ye shall know the truth. (John 
viii. 31-32). 



By Edgar DeWitt Jones, D.D., Minister First Church, Disciples of Christ, 

Bloomington, 111. 

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye tithe mint 
and anise and cummin, and have left undone the weightier matters of the 
law, justice, and mercy, and faith; but these ye ought to have -done, and 
not to have left the other undone. Ye blind guides, that strain out the 
gnat, and swallow the camel !" — Matthew 23:23, 24. 

The twenty-third chapter of Matthew contains the 
most caustic of Christ's recorded utterances. It is an 
indictment of the formal religionists, the scribes and 
.Pharisees who were in the audience that day. Jesus' at- 
tack of their hypocritical character is terrible and of 
withering intensity. The charges are direct, specific, 
and concrete. The words fall from the great prophet's 
lips like a shower of shrapnel upon battle-field. There 
are seven woes in this chapter, pronounced against a pe- 
culiarly vicious type of religious leader. These woes re- 
semble as many peals of thunder in their unanswerable 
severity. Be sure such plainness of speech is not incon- 
sistent with Jesus' love : it is in perfect harmony with the 
protest of his ministry against the substitution of forms 
for spirit, ceremony for service. Love is not love at all 
unless it be capable of indignation against wrong. Yet, 
if the speaking of this vehement indictment is like a 
storm, the end of it resembles the gentle rain that some- 
times follows a terrific gale. Christ lifts his voice in 
strain of tenderest utterance, and exclaims, "0 Jerusa- 
lem, Jerusalem, that killeth the prophets and stoneth 
them that are sent unto her! how often would I have 



gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth 
her chickens under her wings, and ye would not ! ' ' 

It is from this vigorous chapter that one of Jesus * 
seven indictments is selected for consideration: "Woe 
unto you, scribes and Pharisees, for ye tithe mint and 
anise and cummin, and have left undone the weightier 
matters of the law, justice, and mercy, and faith." 

"Mint and anise and cummin." These herbs speci- 
fied by Jesus were the commonest and least valuable. 
Mint was a garden herb of an agreeable odor, similar to 
the plant known to us by the same name. Anise, known 
also as "dill," was used by confectioners and perfumers. 
Cummin was a plant of the same genus as fennel. Under 
the law tithes had to be paid upon all the increase of 
the seed. The point of Jesus ' criticism was that these re- 
ligious leaders were very careful to tithe even of the 
smallest plants, but were indifferent to common honesty 
and simple justice. Jesus accuses them of straining out 
a gnat and swallowing a camel. A startling and ludi- 
crous figure this! The Hindus phrase it, "Swallowing 
an elephant and being choked with a flea. ' ' The meaning 
of so sensational a statement is obvious. Long before 
the modern crusade against germs the scribes and Phari- 
sees were accustomed to strain wine through linen or 
gauze, lest they should unawares drink some little insect 
that would render them ceremonially unclean. Yet these 
same men were not at all averse to dishonesty and ava- 
rice. It was this punctilious regard of the religionists of 
Jesus' day for minute interpretations of the law and a 
placidly indifferent attitude toward the weightier mat- 
ters, that aroused His indignation and brought about 
the denunciation recorded in Matthew twenty-three. 

Trifles still tyrannize our race. Multitudes are yet in 
bondage to mint, anise, and cummin. The tendency to 
excess in trifles in nowhere seen at such disadvantage as 


in the conduct of religion. Divisions in Christendom 
have occurred over the most trivial causes. The manner 
of wearing the beard, of dressing the hair, of fastening 
wearing apparel — these and other apparently trifling 
reasons have divided Christendom into competitive 
camps and rival communions. 

Trifling differences in theology have separated breth- 
ren in the Lord. Thus two members of different com- 
munions engaged in a heated argument as to the * ' order 
of faith and repentance in conversion. ' ' The one con- 
tended stoutly that faith precedes repentance; the other 
as vigorously argued that repentance comes first. A 
bitter estrangement was the outcome of the controversy. 
Another manifested a martyr spirit in defense of his 
conviction that the act of immersion was invalidated if 
by chance so much as ' 6 a single hair of the head escaped 
submersion." Still another contended that the Lord's 
Supper could not be Scripturally observed if more than 
one cup were used. It would be easy to multiply exam- 
ples of this type of mind in religion. Such persons 
have a passion for stressing trifles and magnifying the 
inconsequential. They forget that "God has called us 
to build temples, not to whittle sticks." 

George Whitefield once engaged in a controversy with 
a religionist who affirmed with much warmth that * * every 
pin in the tabernacle is precious." Whitefield calmly 
answered, "Yes, and to those who hold that view the pin 
is apt to be more precious than the whole tabernacle." 
Erasmus in an indictment of the monks of his age, said, 
• ' The same men who think the devil will have them if they 
change the shape of their frocks, are not afraid to in- 
trigue and lie. They shudder if they have left out a verse 
in a Psalm, and they tell each other questionable stories 
longer than their prayers." 


"lis not the wide phylactery, 
Nor stubborn fasts, nor stated prayers 

That make us saints; 
We judge the tree by what it bears; 
And when a man can live apart 
From works on theological trusts, 
I know the blood about the heart 
Is dry as dust. 

Trifles often clog the wheels of organized Christian- 
ity. Passing strange it is that men and women who 
manifest in business and society a large and liberal 
spirit, sometimes exhibit a parsimonious nature in the 
conduct of Christian affairs. Especially is this true in 
church finances. Men who sit on director's boards in big 
"business and coolly give their vote in transactions where 
tens of thousands of dollars are at stake, have been 
known to perspire freely and appear much crestfallen in 
the presence of a small deficit at a church officiary meet- 
ing. Obstacles that are regarded as mole hills in run- 
ning a grocery, dry-goods store, or bank, become veri- 
table mountains in the conduct of financing a church. 

The tyranny of trifles in religion is to be seen also in 
the tenacity with which we cling to certain forms of serv- 
ice. In no other realm is one so likely to become a 
slave to worn out methods. The "traditions of the el- 
ders" are nowhere so strong and authoritative as in 
ecclesiastical circles. Church members have often be- 
come so wedded to a method of contributing to the ex- 
pense budget that they will fervidly oppose any other, 
even though assured that it will make for spiritual cul- 
ture and increased offerings. Innovations here are often 
met with stubborn opposition. If a weekly method of 
contribution will greatly increase the efficiency of a con- 
gregation in systematic financial support, it is difficult 
to understand the reluctance of some to change from 
monthly or quarterly methods. Are not all members of 
one body, and have not all severally to work together to- 
ward a common goal? How great is the need for a prac- 


tice of the noble sentiment, "In faith unity, in opinions 
and methods liberty, in all things charity. ' ' 

It is a subtle test of a Christian's mettle when his pet 
plan is ruthlessly set aside for a better one. Well it is 
for the world and for us that occasionally our favorite 
schemes are torpedoed and sunk. John Wesley brought 
to his great field of activity the outlook and spirit of a 
high churchman and the consequent love of form and rit- 
ual. God only knows what he suffered when he threw 
to the winds his opinions and preferences and gave the 
masses the Word of God by mouth of spiritually minded 
laymen. Educated to believe that no one had the right 
to preach unless ordained by the established church, he 
was horrified when his brethren of the laity first began to 
evangelize the commoners. Nevertheless when he saw 
that their work was blessed of God he accommodated his 
own opinion to the practical demonstration of the value 
of lay preaching. Wisely then he trained the laymen for 
this fruitful kind of evangelism, and the result was that 
Methodism shook all England. 

There is only one cure for the mint and anise and 
cummin type of mind, and that is the mind of the Master. 
Jesus came protesting against the tyranny of trifles in 
religion. He threw his magnificent manhood full and 
free athwart the cold, calculating formalists who were in 
seats of authority in the Jewish church. He was an 
Amplifier, an Emancipator, a mighty Deliverer! There 
was amplitude in His views of God and man. The God 
he revealed was a God of justice, of mercy, and of truth. 
The mankind he revealed was a large and munificent 
humanity. He created a spiritual atmosphere that was 
wholesome to breathe — so sweet it was, so full of tonic 
purity. His vision was vast and his sympathy bound- 
less. His vocabulary was characterized by catholic 
terms and words of oceanlike wideness. Pie loved the 
word "all"; and "whosoever" was often on His lips. 


The scribes and Pharisees regarded him with suspicion 
and opposed him at every turn. With splendid disre- 
gard of the man-made rules for the Sabbath he exempli- 
fied the Golden Rule by doing good on the holy day. 
He exalted man above ritual, love above the letter, and 
justice above punctilious concern for the peccadillos of 

The ample Christ challenges our standards as he did 
the scribes and Pharisees of His dav. He observes the 
smallness of our spiritual concepts, the littleness of our 
creedal systems, the meagreness of our ministries, the 
misplaced emphasis of much of our teaching. And He 
calls us to larger views of God and man. Our deep- 
rooted prejudices give Him pain. Our provincial views 
disappoint Him. Our supreme selfishness pierces his 
great heart like a sword. The very greatness of his 
presence, the vastness of his spirit, the boundlessness of 
his love, rebuke us. Surveying Him in all his loveliness, 
the tyranny of the trivial becomes insufferable ; and unto 
Christ we cry : 

On my heart your mighty charm renew; 
Still, still let me as I gaze upon you 
Feel my soul becoming vast like you. 



On another page of this journal will be found under the "Octave 
of Prayers for Unity," a very interesting suggestion prepared by the 
Bishop of Bombay in the observance of the "Week of Prayer for this 
year. It will help in preparation for the Week of Prayer, January 18-25, 
1919 (January 5-12 eastern calendar). Mr. Robert H. Gardiner, Secre- 
tary of the Protestant Episcopal Commission on the World Conference, 
Gardiner, Me., has already prepared most satisfactory suggestions for the 
observance in 1919, which may be secured by writing him. 

The Bishop of Hereford is causing some talk around the world, be- 
cause of his bold statements regarding unity. The Christian Work, New 
York says: 

"Dr. Hensley Henson, the Bishop of Hereford, preaching recently in 
Westminster Abbey, made a powerful appeal for sincerity in religion, and 
therefore for doctrinal restatement, and an honest revision of the Prayer 
Book formularies. He showed that inevitably there has always been a 
growing divergence between official statements and the actual living 
faith of Christians — crises time after time occur when a readjustment has 
to be made. The Reformation was only the greatest, and not the last, 
of such crises. When the Church of England accepted the Reformation 
it accepted the principle of such readjustment. The startling rapidity 
with which new knowledge came during the past century has brought 
us face to face with a situation essentially similar to that which confronted 
our fathers four centuries ago. If we take to heart the lesson of the past 
we shall see how futiJe and foolish is mere timid conservatism, and how 
wise is a reverent and courageous effort to re-interpret the old faith in the 
light of the new knowledge and to readjust traditional forms of religion 
in the interest of sincerity. 

As a bishop Dr. Henson is showing himself not less but more set 
upon promoting cordial relations between Anglicans and Nonconformists. 
In a sermon at St. Martin's, Trafalgar Square, he hit the nail on the head 
when, he said that prejudices due to religious isolation were the chief 
causes that kept them asunder. Estranging memories and habits much 
more than differences of belief formed a barrier between them. As a step 
toward a better understanding, Dr. Henson urged that interchange of 
pulpits, with reasonable securities against local friction, might be easily ar- 
ranged if Anglicans were willing; Nonconformists had made it clear 
enough that they were ready for the step. Why should not the bishops 
sanction the preaching of non- Anglican preachers in parish churches where 
the incumbent and churchwardens united in desiring them to do so? Es- 
pecially at the present time, when the withdrawal of the clergy for war 
services was. limiting services in parishes, why should not the services of 
suitable Nonconformist ministers be utilized for common edification? 



The Challenge, London, an Anglican journal, supports Dr. Henson and 

All of us who read religious or theological books have learnt 
from writers belonging to other denominations. There are men who 
in the exercise of their ministry have shown beyond all dispute that they are 
endowed with the gift of teaching or of prophecy. Why should Church- 
men be deprived of the advantage of hearing their message delivered with 
the full force of the living personality? Could not the bishops formally 
recognise a group of such teachers as men who might rightly be invited 
to preach the Word of God in our churches? That would be a manifes- 
tation of unity in direct relation to an advantage gained thereby, 
and it would have the additional merit of helping to disentangle fthis 
whole subject from controversies about orders and sacraments. Half 
our difficulties in this connection arise from our habitual confusion 
of the ministry of preaching with the ministry of sacraments, 
consequent upon our practical limitation of the authority to preach 
to those who are also ordained priests. The prophetic and the 
priestly ministry are not the same, and men can be recognized and wel- 
comed as prophets without any prejudice to the question of priestly order. 
We would, however, suggest one further step which might well be taken, if 
sanction is given, in places where the temper and atmosphere are suitable. 
Could there not be special services of prayer, alternately in the church and 
the chapel, at which the Nonconformist minister would lead in the church 
and the Anglican priest would lead in the chapel, each trying to explain 
at the same time some point either of identity or of difference? All who 
came would know to what they were coming, and fundamental unity would 
be manifested in a way calculated to promote that mutual understanding 
which is the indispensable preliminary to the real reunion for which all 
Christians are bound to pray. We offer these suggestions, for we are sure 
that the time is come to pass from talk to action and are equally sure that 
the action must be wise, related to real needs, and careful to avoid either 
anarchy or the compromise of principle. 

"A country vicar'' in England sought to put into practise these sug- 
gestions, but his bishop rebuked him. He tells it in a letter in The Chal- 
lenge as follows: 

I cannot but feel that the Church of England has been allowed 
to lose a chance of re-establishing Christian unity in this land such as 
she has never had and is never likely to have again. 

This is a parish in which quite half the people are, and have been 
for generations, Nonconformists. At the very beginning of the war it 
happened to be impossible to communicate with our bishop. I therefore 
got the Nonconformist minister to join me in an appeal, signed by both 
of us, to all the people, headed "Let us pray,'" saying? that as political 
differences had been sunk for the time, so we thought might religious 
differences be, and that there would be meetings for intercession in al- 
ternate weeks on a week-day in church and chapel. We used only the first 
issued form of intercession with its appointed lessons and psalms in both 
places. In chapel the minister read most of the prayers and occasionally 
there was an extempore prayer, and a short address from me or him. In 
church I read all the prayers and gave the address, the minister taking 
only the Lord's prayer and the Lessons. The buildings were always 
quite full with a mixed congregation. I also issued a special appeal to 
church-people only, urging them to come to Holy Communion, which 
they did in large numbers. 

As soon as it was possible for me to communicate with the bishop and 


tell him what had been done, I did so, and received in reply a very- 
kindly but very decided rebuke, bidding me put a stop to the arrangement. 
There was nothing for me but to obey, so the services were quietly dropped 
without any reason being assigned. 

The Living Church, Milwaukee, sums up the heritage of the modern 
Protestant Episcopal bishop as follows: 

The fifteenth century bishop lived a life of luxury and political as- 
surance and the demand for the Reformation was the result. The six- 
teenth century bishop opposed reform in the church and the Protestant re- 
volt was the result. The seventeenth century bishop stood for the divine 
right of Kings and the democratic suspicion of the church was the result. 
The eighteenth century bishop sought to stifle enthusiasm in the church 
and the Methodist secession was the result. The nineteenth century bishop 
sought to ' ( stamp out ritualism ' ' and the lawlessness of ' ' ritualists ' ', 
coupled with their distrust of the bishops, was the result. 

In these five sentences we may fairly account for the position of the 
Anglo-Saxon world with respect to the episcopate in the twentieth cen- 
tury. If the Protestant world is not enthusiastic over the historic epis- 
copate, and the Catholic Churchman is still a little unwilling to confide his 
future unreservedly into the hands of a bishop who may be succeeded 
to-morrow by an ultra-partisan of the nineteenth century school, it is be- 
cause the appeal to history is not reckoned treason by Anglo-Saxons, be 
they within or without the church. 

The twentieth century bishop therefore inherits a whole stream of 
evil traditions. In America the tendency is now distinctly upward; in 
England, due to the fact that Lloyd-Georges and Asquiths have succeeded 
to Gladstones and Salisburys, the tendency seems to be to revert to middle 
nineteenth century limitations or to create new ones. In neither country 
has the episcopate really assumed a normal place in the life of the church. 
Unless Churchmen themselves recognize this, it will be impossible for them 
to understand why Protestants outside the church stumble at accepting the 
historic episcopate, while many a bishop will earnestly lament that those 
of his clergy who stand most strongly for the episcopate of the apostolic 
succession in the abstract are most 'difficult to bring within the influence 
of their own particular bishops. If anybody thinks that to be made a 
bishop after five centuries of common episcopal maladministration is to 
assume an easy task, he little knows the real troubles of the modern bishop. 
For if ever, on the whole, the members of an order have tried honestly to 
undo mistakes of their predecessors in the past, the modern bishop in 
America, at least, has tried to do it. And we doubt whether there has 
been in the last five centuries in any national church an episcopate that 
levels up in spiritual efficiency with that of our own American church and 
of those other Anglican churches that choose their own bishops. 

But the result of the history that has been made is two-fold: it has 
resulted in tying the hands of the bishop by legal enactments lest he do 
some harm; but also in tying them so lightly that if he has the desire to 
run amuck in his diocese his poor clergy and laity have little redress. 
Ninety-nine per cent of the modern bishops are tied up because one per 
cent of them, in their enthusiasm for the truth as God or their mental lim- 
itations enable them to see it, are showing how much mischief an unre- 
strained but enthusiastic bishop can do. 

And there is the fundamental difficulty that the precise limits of the 
bishop's authority, whether in a parish or in his diocese, are in some doubt. 
Neither our legislation nor the few judicial decisions, secular or ecclesiasti- 
cal, that we have, are free from ambiguity. 


At a recent meeting in the crypt of St. Paul's Cathedral, London, 
Dr. James Cooper, Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of 
Scotland, delivered an address dealing with the consolidation of the Pres- 
byterian bodies in Scotland and the possibility of uniting with them the 
Episcopal Church of Scotland. According to the report in The Ghtardian, 
he said : 

Under such a scheme Episcopalians would accept the Presbyterian 
system of ecclesiastical courts, which co-existed with episcopacy in Scotland 
in the seventeenth century at times that Episcopalians looked back to as 
parts of their own history; Presbyterians would accept episcopal consecra- 
tion for constant moderators of synod, who would take part in future ordi- 
nations and be practically diocesan bishops. An arrangement could be made 
for the period of transition to safeguard the rights of conscience on both 
sides. Episcopalians would not have to accept sacraments at the hands of 
those whose orders they doubted, and Presbyterians would not be required to 
deny the reality of their experiences in things spiritual. In some such 
way as this effect could be given to the resolution of the last Lambeth 
Conference, which suggested that an approach to negotiations on the lines 
of the precedents of 1610 might be made if opportunity offered. The 
fact of episcopacy would be accepted and the continuity of the historical 
episcopate, but in conjunction with the Scottish church courts from 
kirk sessions to General Assembly. They would keep their lay-elders, 
and hold fast to the rights, liberties, and privileges appertaining to a 
national part of a catholic church. They would be united with England 
in the quadrilateral stronghold — the Holy Scriptures, the Apostles' and 
Nicene Creeds, the administration of the sacraments of baptism and 
holy communion, and the form of government by bishops. 

The following letter in The Challenge, London, is only among the 
many that are appearing in the religious press of the world, indicating a 
universal desire for the unity of the Church: 

Would it not be possible to call together in conference those who are 
feeling the stirrings of the Holy Spirit on the matter of Christian unity, 
that they may quiescently give themselves into His hands for leading at 
this juncture? 

The leaven, or, as Weymoth has it, the yeast, is plainly working in the 
Kingdom of God. Such movements as the World Conference on Faith 
and Order, the Life and Liberty Movement, the Free Catholic Society, the 
Student Movement, the Auxiliary Conference of Oxford, the Fellowship of 
Reconciliation, as well as the testimony of chaplains of practically every 
denomination at the front show that the inner unity of Christians in 
Christ is seeking outward expression. 

Surely if leaders and representatives of the great churches and of 
these and kindred societies representing various "movements" met to- 
gether and waited definitely for guidance, even should the waiting time 
be as long as at the first Pentecost, the Holy 1 Spirit would guide the church 
"into all truth" in this and in other necessary matters? 

Is not the world's bankruptcy the church's opportunity? Many are 
looking wistfully to her, and men openly say they see no hope for the 
future of the world except in religion; but what a hope is there if men 
would but seize it! 

The action of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in 
the U. S. A. at its annual meeting in Columbus, O., in May is being dis- 


cussed by many journals. Favorable quotations were made in the last 
issue of THE QUARTERLY and we still feel that every one interested in 
the larger things of the church must look upon the action with favor. Some, 
however, approach it timidly. The Lutheran says: 

When the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church at its re- 
cent meeting passed a resolution favoring a general union of Protestant 
bodies, without mention of a doctrinal basis upon which it was to be 
founded, the question at once occurred to many minds: Is the Presbyte- 
rian Church ready to discard its symbols and fall in line with the doc- 
trinal indifference of the time? Hitherto it has been characteristic of 
this Church to stand strong for the faith. It was noted in the past as 
a witness-bearing church, and had a confessional consciousness that was 
in marked contrast with that of the communions with which it is now by 
force of circumstances more or less intimately thrown into contact. Un- 
ion Seminary, with its liberal theology, has proven to be a thorn in its 
flesh, and has done much to weaken this confessional consciousness. The 
influence of this liberal theology made itself increasingly felt at every 
convention in recent years, until at the late assembly it swept everything 
before it and brought forth the above resolution. 

The Evangelical Herald, St. Louis, does not agree with The Lutheran, 
but questions the practicabilitjr of the suddenness of the call. It says: 

In our opinion the proposition of immediate organic union of all Prot- 
estant church bodies is not only somewhat sudden, but also rather more ad- 
vanced than most members of these bodies would care to consider or un- 
dertake just now. It is also a question whether or not organic union of 
all the Protestant church bodies is desirable under any circumstances, while 
it is quite certain that organic union without a far greater spirit of unity 
than now prevails would be a failure even if it could be brought about 
at a short notice and little trouble. Nevertheless we appreciate thoroughly 
the fraternal spirit in which the action of the Presbyterian General Assem- 
bly was taken, and we trust that, whatever form its results may take, it 
will bring the Protestant bodies of the country nearer to each other and 
show the urgent need of better understanding and closer approach and co- 

We do not agree with The Lutheran, however, in assuming that the 
proposition of an immediate organic union of all Protestant church bodies 
necessarily implies that the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. is about 
to "discard its symbols and fall in line with the doctrinal indifference 
of the time. " To our mind the proposition shows, not a lack of earnest 
confessional conviction, but rather a conviction just as earnest and sin- 
cere that something more than confessional conviction and consciousness is 
needed to meet the pressing religious needs of men today. A strong con- 
fessional consciousness is good and necessary, and one cannot be a well- 
grounded Christian without possessing it in some form, but the idea that 
getting together and working together with others who have different con- 
victions can only mean the abandoning of one's own conviction is entirely 

The voices for immediate action toward unity are multiplying. The 
Congregationalist, Boston, says: 

The experiences of war, which have brought the English-speaking 
peoples into a new intimacy of brotherhood, have done much to further the 


cause of reunion by giving it the background of a powerful and interested 
lay opinion. 

Both the need and the duty of immediate action were indicated by the 
English Bishop of Winchester, Dr. Talbot, in a speech at a public meeting 
in connection with the Wesleyan missionary anniversaries in London. 
He said: 

"The churches ought to feel and show the unity that was between 
them. One of the lessons of the war was that, in the ordinary man's 
judgment, the churches had been successful in showing their differences 
and unsuccessful in showing their agreement. The men in the army 
thought of them as competitors at the best and as antagonists at the 
worst, whereas they were allies and comrades, between whom there were 
misunderstandings and differences of points of view, but with whom the 
comradeship was the outstanding thing.' ' 

Dr. Talbot emphasized his own approval of existing points of agree- 
ment recently outlined by Dr. Hodgkin, viz.: loyalty to Christ, the convic- 
tion of the central truths of the Gospel, the discovery of God as mani- 
fested in the Son reconciling the worid to himself, and the positive love of 
all men that flowed from this. 

The recently elected Bishop of Hereford, Dr. Hensley Henson, has 
long been known as an advocate of closer relations between the English -Es- 
tablished Church and the Free Churches. He preached recently at the 
Bloomsbury Central Baptist Church in London and said that as Bishop 
"he hoped to build bridges across chasms." "If we believe, r> he said 
' ' that separation isi wrong, we must go on and try to correct it. We must 
not rest until we have got rid of divisions. The war has disclosed for us 
with the brilliant decisiveness of a lightning flash the insensate folly of 
denominational divisions. ' ' 

On our own side of the Atlantic voices are also heard urging both 
the immediate duty and possibility of approaches between the divided 
communions of the church. Dr. Charles L. Slattery, rector of Grace Church, 
New York, in his baccalaureate sermon at Columbia urged that the unifica- 
tion of the churches be begun immediately, in order that it may be per- 
manent. Taking as precedent the steps toward a lasting world federation 
indicated in the appointment of General Foch to command the armies 
of democracy, he went on to say: 

"It is quite the same with the visions which good men are having of a 
united Christianity. Stirred by the tales of Christian fellowship in the 
trenches, bishops, moderators, and elders are saying: 'When the victory is 
won, we must plan to get together in the name of Christ and dwell in 
love in one Church which shall honor Him indeed. ' If we wait till the 
strain of war is past, until the feeling of need is reduced, then we shall fall 
back to our pride in our little histories, our conviction of privilege, our 
mutually exclusive authorities — and the unity we dreamed of will be 
definitely remote. If the unity of the church is to come soon, it must be- 
gin to come during this war. It must begin now." 

Rev. Arthur W. Higby, Grand Rapids, Mich., writing in The Chris- 
tian Standard, Cincinnati, O., says that unity cannot be manifested with- 
out a union of visible churches. He says : 

Bishop Anderson, in addressing the convention of the diocese of 
Chicago in May, 1912, made this plain in the following words: 

"It is quite common to contrast unity and union as though a choice 
had to be made between them. The words are not synonymous by any 
means; neither are they mutually exclusive. It is well to define one's 


terms. God makes unity. Man makes union. There might be union 
without unity. There might be a union of the churches which would be 
vastly different from the unity of the church. Nevertheless, unity can be 
shown forth to the world only through union. Under present circumstances 
unity means the union of the churches in the church. It means that the 
whole church encompasses and contains and controls all that pertains to it. 
It meaus that each church shall be visibly incorporated into the whole 
church, and that the whole shall be clearly the property of each. It 
means that, instead of man saying, 'I am a member of the invisible 
church because I belong to one of the visible churches/ he will say: 'I 
belong to the One Visible Church, because there are no visible churches.' 
Extraordinary results are promised from this manifestation of unity. 
These is unity, but the world cannot see it. Our part is to co-operate with 
God and yield to the strivings of the Holy Spirit, so that the unity of 
the church will be actualized and visualized in such corporate manner that 
the world can see with its own eyes, and, seeing it, will believe in the power 
and love of God. " 

And Bishop Rhinelander, of Pennsylvania, makes a similar distinction 
when he says: "Strength is in union, life is in unity. Are we to work 
together that we may be united, or be united that we may work together? 
Union might be sought for the strength that it gives, but unity is sought 
for the life that it gives. ' ' This is like the saying of Bishop Anderson : 
"God makes unity. Man makes union. " The union of separate things may 
bring strength, but the life of a living thing depends upon its unity. Un- 
der present circumstances unity cannot be manifested without a union of 
visible churches. 

Referring to the memorial on joint ordination of army chaplains 
from Dr. Newman Smyth and Prof. Williston Walker to the House of 
Bishops of the Protestant Episcopal Church, which the House rejected, 
they sent a further letter to Bishop T. F. Gailor, chairman of the House 
of Bishops, to which The Congregationalist, Boston, gives the heading 
"Closing the Door." The letter is as follows: 

We would acknowledge the receipt of your kind answer to our 
inquiry whether a special committee of conference might be appointed 
by Bishop Tuttle, the presiding bishop, and yourself as chairman of the 
House of Bishops. You reply, "To this request I am reluctantly com- 
pelled to answer No. ,J As we likewise must reluctantly accept this in- 
ability of the bishops to give serious consideration to our overtures for 
some act of unity, allow us to submit in closing this correspondence 
the following brief statement of our own position: 

1. While the House of Bishops was in session we expressed our readi- 
ness to confer with any of the Bishops at any hour should they desire us 
to do so. We have since been informed that lack of time prevented them 
from accepting this offer. 

2. Subsequently, the suggestion of some possible conference having 
been made to us by the chairman of your Commission on Unity, we sub- 
mitted it with our reply to the presiding bishop, who referred it to 
you. Our position we stated in a letter to you as follows: "Since the 
House of Bishops has closed the door to any overtures from us, our attitude 
must be simply one of readiness to respond to any further proposals that 
may be made to us. Allow us, however, to assure you that, should you with 
the presiding bishop deem it desirable to do so, we on our part would at 
once accept as sufficiently authorized officially any persons you might 
name as entrusted with the conduct of such a conference. ' ' We further 


suggested that a small committee might be desirable composed of men of 
strength and vision. 

3. In your answer you gave as a reason for the declination of our 
offer that "neither the presiding bishop nor the chairman has authority 
to appoint any such committee; the only body that might deal with 
this subject between meetings of the General Convention is the Standing 
Commission on Christian Unity.'' 

4. As this reason was not given in the report presented by the 
Bishop of Vermont and adopted by the House of Bishops, we would call 
attention to a point in our communication which seems to have been over- 
looked in your answer. We addressed the bishops on their own theories 
of the episcopate, waiving for the end in view our own opinions, and rest- 
ing our appeal for unity on the basis of the historic episcopate according 
to the offer of the Lambeth Quadrilateral. We did not then, and we do 
not now, address the bishops as diocesan officials of that branch of the 
church known as the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States, 
but as a portion of a universal episcopate. We are further justified in 
so doing inasmuch as this distinction is clearly and absolutely made in the 
Rules of the House of Bishops (Sec. 21-23). It is therein provided that 
the House at any session may resolve itself into a "Council of Bishops," 
and that the "body known as an assembly of catholic bishops, considering 
and acting upon matters of duty or responsibility resting on them as a por- 
tion of the universal episcopate" may make declarations or recommenda- 
tions and such responsibility and action is there distinguished from "the 
House of Bishops in its constitutional and canonical capacity." 

In this larger and higher responsibility as a portion of the universal 
episcopate we had ventured to ask the bishops to sound some note of lead- 
ership in the present emergency which other communions might gladly fol- 
low. We can now only express our regret that, in your view of the limited 
authority of the American Episcopal office, you find yourself unable to enter 
into the desired conferences at present with other communions. Our regret 
is the greater because, since the beginning of the war, the Archbishops' 
Commission in England has been and is now conducting conferences with 
representatives of the Nonconformist churches there with gratifying and 
promising results. 

While we are obliged to act in accordance with the terms of the official 
resolutions of the House of Bishops, we desire to express our appreciation 
of your words of personal esteem and your explanations of the intention of 
the bishops. Representing our own communion, and in accordance with its 
historic position as claiming to be but one part of the whole church, we 
would seek so to act in relation to your and to other communions that by 
our attitude no other part of the church may be compelled to remain in 
separation from the whole church. We therefore leave our proposals for 
action, with the will for unity, as a standing offer of conciliation on our 
part, and we shall gladly welcome at any time other overtures, should they 
be made. 

One of the finest words spoken on unity comes from Dean Hodgen, of 
the Episcopal Theological School at Cambridge, Mass. He says: 

I, too, keep in view a reunion which gathers within itself every por- 
tion of the Christian family; and my principles require me now to hold 
religious fellowship with all professed Christians. For the present the un- 
reformed churches of East and West refuse me communion; only the re- 
formed churches respond to the appeal of fraternity in Christ. I hold 
that the restoration of fellowship with the unreformed churches will be 
facilitated, not hindered, by the unification of reformed Christendom; 


whereas the opposite policy of Anglican isolation in the hope of ultimate 
admission within the pale of unreformed Christendom appears to me on 
all counts mistaken. Before there can be reunion with the unreformed 
churches they will have to traverse an experience analogous to that which 
the reformed churches traversed in the sixteenth century. In that day the 
question of specific forms of ecclesiastical polity will appear relatively 
petty. Now it fills the horizon. 

According to The Continent, New York and Chicago, Lutheran union 
is in sight. It says: 

By the recent action of several district synods of the Lutheran General 
Council, union of that group of followers of Luther with the General 
Synod and the United Synod of the South is definitely assured. It is ex- 
pected that by November these three branches of Lutheranism will be 
united under the name of ■ the United Lutheran Church of America. The 
new organization will enroll about 1,000,000 members. Only one of the 
forty-four district synods of the three uniting denominations has rejected 
the union proposals, the Swedish Augustana Synod, related to the state 
church of Sweden, preferring to remain independent. The union movement 
grew directly out of arrangements made three years ago for the joint 
celebration of the 400th anniversary of the Protestant reformation. 

Kikuyu will always be associated with Christian Unity. Another at- 
tempt has been made there for the unity of the Christian forces in north- 
eastern Africa. The Congregationalist, Boston, says: 

An important missionary conference was held at the well-known mis- 
sionary center of Kikuyu in northeastern Africa at the end of July with 
reference to missionary co-operation and union in all that important region 
of the Dark Continent. The Anglican Bishops of Uganda, Mombasa and 
Zanzibar were present, together with the heads of various missionary so- 
cieties. The plan of constitutional alliance brought before the conference 
was accepted by the Church Missionary Society, the Church of Scotland, 
the United Methodist and African Inland Missions, and a representative 
council was formed. An alternative plan was suggested by the Bishop of 
Zanzibar, who opposed the previous conference at Kikuyu, but was not 
accepted. A unanimous agreement was reached not to rest until all the 
churches in that region should share one ministry and should become a 
united church of Europeans and natives. Cooperation was promised from 
missions which did not enter the alliance. United educational, medical and 
social work is to be organized and an annual conference is to be held. So 
one of the great and difficult missionary fields of the world, face to face 
with a militant Mohammedanism, is setting an example of large coopera- 
tion and imminent union to the home churches. 

Home Mission week is November 17-24, 1918. The Home Mission 
Council, through its executive secretary, Rev. Alfred Williams Anthony, 
156 Fifth Ave., New York, has sent out the following bulletin: 

The war has presented many stern necessities. Two, which affect 
all people, seem destined this coming fall and winter to compel many 
churches either (1) to hold no services, or (2) to hold services together 
as union services. 


The two necessities are lack of fuel and lack of men. There is a real' 
shortage of fuel. In some places it may become a famine. Throughout 
the country there is also a no less real shortage of man-power, and in the 
ministry the lack is even more acute than in many other callings and pro- 
fessions. Although not subject to the draft, yet clergymen and theologi- 
cal students have enlisted, some in the regular ranks of army and navy, 
many more as chaplains, camp pastors, Red Cross chaplains, and Y. M. C. 
A. workers, and a large number is engaged in civilian employment, which 
releases other men for camp and overseas. This scarcity of men for pas- 
torates is being felt in every denomination and part of the country. 

If the church cannot obtain fuel and cannot secure preachers, what 
must she do? 

But there is a higher privilege for her than decisions brought about 
by compulsion. Now is the time for her voluntarily, before necessity con- 
strains, to plan for union services, thereby making the saving the neces- 
sity of which seems imminent, and at the same time enjoying the inspi- 
ration of Christian fellowship with other people who serve God, perhaps 
through slightly different forms, but no less genuinely serve Him. There 
is opportunity here in the homeland to express in practical and concrete 
ways the spiritual unity of all Christians, which the fellowship, in patriotic 
sacrifices overseas, we are told, is now producing in the soldiers and sailors 
of the country. 

The Home Missions Council, through its executive officers, makes an 
earnest appeal to all Christian churches seriously to consider the possibili- 
ties of joining with their church neighbors in common worship, and united 
ministries in the communities in which they are placed. If fuel and men 
can thereby be saved, — if fellowship can be enlarged and efficiency be in- 
creased, no richer testimony could be given to the adaptability and peren- 
nial vigor of the church of Jesus Christ to serve in our modern world. 

The Christian Century, Chicago, gives interesting accounts of the 
federation of the California Avenue Congregational Church and the Mon- 
roe Street Church of Disciples, Chicago; also the federation of the First 
Baptist Church with the Memorial Church (Disciples and Baptists), Chi- 
cago. Of the first mentioned federation it says: 

The federation is for the period of two years at least and should 
the war continue longer than that, for the remaining period of the war. 
The two congregations will, during this period, unite for worship and serv- 
ice under the leadership of a pastor and such other paid workers as may 
be jointly chosen to serve the federated church, which will be known as the 
Monroe Street Federated Church (Congregationalists and Disciples). Each 
church will continue to maintain its identity as a church, continuing its 
present organization with such slight changes as may seem advisable and 
permissible without in any way affecting its integrity as a corporate church. 

Of the second instance it says: 

The federation has naturally called for minor concessions on both 
sides, but there was no demand for either one to yield anything vital. The 
government of the federated Church is in the hands of a board of control 
of ten, five elected from each Church. Every matter of interest is passed 
upon by the board of control, and by them recommended to the united 
Churches. Each Church is to retain its identity; when new members come 
in they are to choose the method of baptism and the Church in which they 
are to be enrolled. No influence is to be brought in any way to determine 
which one any is to join. 



To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — Please permit me a word in regard to the Bishop of Willo- 
chra's critique of my article in the July number of the The Christian 
Union Quarterly. The Bishop is entirely right in his criticism. At 
the same time, I think he will understand how the apparently arrogant tone 
crept into the paper when an explanation of the circumstances under which 
it was prepared is made. It was written to be read before the Northern 
Illinois Ministerial Institute of the Disciples of Christ. When, therefore, 
I said ''Doubtless no proof is required for those who will discuss the 
paper to show that the first (theory) only demands our consideration/' 
I was referring to the Illinois ministers who were to discuss the paper 
after it had been read before the Institute. It was useless to take time, 
for such an audience, to criticise either of the theories discarded by 
the author of the paper, nor do I think the Bishop will feel that there was 
any assumption of arrogance in dismissing them so summarily, under the 

It is certainly true, however, that when the article found a larger 
audience in The Quarterly, the language should have been altered to 
represent correctly that audience or else the facts regarding the special 
and limited group for which the paper was prepared originally should have 
been stated. I accept the Bishop 's impeachment that for the article to 
appear as it did was exceedingly unfortunate. Permit me to assure him, 
however, that the error was simply an oversight, and that the oversight 
on the author's part is accompanied by sincere repentance. It may be 
some consolation for Bishop White and others who agree with him, to 
know that the author of the apparently arrogant article in the January 
Quarterly is really as much opposed to the spirit which the Bishop so 
justly condemns as the latter can be himself. What we all need is more 
humility, and Protestants need it quite as much as any others. The Bish- 
op 's letter throughout is admirable and commands my warmest sympathy. 

Very sincerely yours, 

Cincinnati, Ohio. Frederick D. Kershner. 


To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — I highly value The Quarterly and have read with 
deep interest the article in the last number by Dr. Garvie. We need to 
make the church the body Christ prayed for. While we are true to the 
commands of the Saviour should we not also be true in present conditions 
and even bear in mind the impossibility of us all hearing and thinking 
and feeling alike when we are constituted so differently? The Christian is 
known by his daily life, not by his beliefs, which may be warped by edu- 
cation or environments. We must give the same liberty to others that we 
claim for ourselves. 

Yours sincerely, 

Newark, Ohio. S. C. Priest. 


To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — The Quarterly is deeply appreciated. You will be inter- 
ested in knowing that the cause of Christian Union is receiving great at- 
tention in the State of South Australia, earnest efforts being made at 
the present to unite the Congregationalists, Methodists and Presbyterians. 
The efforts toward unity are receiving great support from the churches 
mentioned. This work for what may be described as sectional union is 
taken up with the view of more comprehensive union in the future. There 
is a general and earnest conviction in Australia that the time for the heal- 
ing of the divisions created in the past has come and that prayerful 
efforts to this end are a sacred obligation resting upon the churches of this 
generation. Yours very sincerely, 

W. Penry Jones. 

Adelaide, Australia. Secretary Congregational Union. 


To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — For some considerable time the Presbyterian and Metho- 
dist churches in Queensland have been co-operating principally in camp 
work in connection with the Queensland soldiers, and in relation to the 
Home Mission work of the two churches. A very definite and important 
step has now been taken by the two churches in respect to education. 
Towards the end of last year committees of both churches, but unknown 
to each other, were negotiating for the purchase of a boys* college and 
a girls' high school and each church had practically decided to make the 
purchase. Before, however, these were complete, it became known to one 
or two leading men in each church that these negotiations were proceeding, 
and a suggestion was made that the efficiency of both schools would be 
greatly increased if the two churches could arrange to purchase the 
schools jointly. This led to the appointment of a joint committee, com- 
posed of four representatives from each church. This joint committee 
held many meetings, and eventually purchased both of the schools, and 
these were taken over on behalf of the two churches on the first of last 
month. The financial arrangements were satisfactorily settled, and the 
form of government of the schools received necessarily much consideration. 
Eventually it was decided to form a corporation under the name of the 
Presbyterian and Methodist Schools Association, and the constitution of 
this association as drafted by the joint committee, was unanimously adopted 
by both the Presbyterian Assembly and the Methodist Conference. 

On the 22nd of July the inaugural ceremony was held in the exhi- 
bition building, the accommodation of which was taxed to its utmost, 
many being obKged to stand throughout the meeting. 

You will be pleased to know that both of the schools have opened 
their present term with a record number of pupils, in fact, some pupils 
have had to be refused owing to want of accommodation. The association 
now has under consideration the expenditure of a very considerable sum of 
money in providing further accommodation and equipment. 

We all realize that this is a very important and practical step towards 
ultimate church union, and that this action of the two churches will, 
perhaps, more than anything else foster the union spirit. Knowing your 
very deep interest in the cause of Christian unity I thought that you 
would be pleased to have the foregoing particulars. 

Yours very sincerely, 

Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. James J. King. 


AN ETHICAL PHILOSOPHY OF LIFE Presented in its Main Out- 
lines. By Felix Adler. New York and London: D. Appleton and 
Company. 1918. 380 pages. $3.00 net. 

This book is a record of a philosophy of life based upon the experience 
of the author. The book is divided into four parts. The first is an auto- 
biographical discussion of the various experiences through which he passed 
before he arrived at his present position, giving his appreciation and ap- 
praisements of the Hebrew religion, Emerson's philosophy, Christian ethics, 
socialism, and other reform movements. The second part is an exposition 
of his philosophical theory. The third part treats of the application of 
the theory as applied to sickness, sorrow and sin. The fourth part deals 
with the theory as applied to the family, the vocation, the state, the inter- 
national society and the Church, closing with a most interesting chapter 
on the last outlook on life. Without dogmatism and in a charming affir- 
mation he boldly seeks to find a stronger life-basis than the present day 
civilization has offered. In dissenting from some of his positions, one 
finds himself assenting whole-heartedly to other positions that are both 
reasonable and satisfying. Whatever theory the reader may have regarding 
the philosophy of life, the reading of this book will increase the passion 
for the application to which this philosophy leads. Dr. Adler has always 
been an independent and earnest thinker. This book sums up the experi- 
ences of his thought and challenges those who hold to some of the theories 
which he discards as to why we have maintained the superficial in many of 
these theories rather than going to their fullness in practical application. 
It is a book preeminently worth while. 

Canon and Precentor of St. Paul's Cathedral. London and New York: 
Longmans, Green & Co. 74 pages. 50 cents net. 

This little book is one in a series of lectures published by the Liverpool 
Diocesan Board of Divinity Publications. The series deals with the great 
questions and issues of the Christian religion. This volume contains three 
lectures on "The Church in the New Testament," "The Authority of the 
Christian Ministry," and "The World's Need of a Catholic Church." 
The author deals bravely and thoughtfully with the tragic facts of the 
world as it is in this critical hour and pleads for a conception of Chris- 
tianity and the Christian Church great enough to cover the world's case. 
"We have now reached the point when we begin to appreciate the force 
of the contention that the supreme need of the hour is a catholic Church. 
If we have long been realizing with growing intensity 'the dangers we are 



in through our unhappy divisions ', the spectacle which Christendom pre- 
sents at this moment should drive us to our knees in penitence and prayer. 
*****A catholic society, a body that exists in every nation yet draws all 
that is best in national life into the unity of the Spirit and the bond of 
peace is the supreme need of the world. " 

RELIGIOUS REALITY. A Book for Men. By A. E. J. Rawlinson, 
Student of Christ Church, Oxford; Examining Chaplain to the Bishop 
of Lichfield; Priest-in-Charge of St. John the Evangelist, Wilton 
Road, S. W. ; Formerly Tutor of Keble College, and Late Chaplain to 
the Forces. London and New York: Longmans, Green & Co. 183 
pages. $1.50 net. 

The Bishop of Lichfield, who writes the preface to this book, says of it, 
1 1 This is a book which is wanted. Thoughtful men, in every class, are not 
afraid of theology, i. e. of a reasoned account of their religion, but they 
want a theology which can be stated without conventions and technicalities ; 
they do not at all care for a religion which pretends to do away with all 
mystery, but they are glad to be assured of the essential reasonableness 
of the Christian Faith. The best of them are not at all afraid of a reli- 
gion which makes big demands on them, but they know well enough the 
difficulty of responding to these claims, and their greatest need of all is 
to find and use that life and power, coming from a living person, without 
which our best aspirations must fail and our highest ideals remain unreal- 
ized. These needs seem to me to be satisfactorily and happily met in the 
following pages. " The book was written out of the author 'a experience 
in preparing men in military hospitals for Confirmation. The work is in 
three parts. Part I deals with ' • The Theory of the Christian Religion ; ' ' 
Part II with ' l The Practice of the Christian Religion ; ' ' and Part III with 
"The Maintenance of the Christian Life. " It is a thoroughly practical 
book, very suggestive and helpful. 

IN A DAY OF SOCIAL REBUILDING. By Henry Sloane Coffin, Minis- 
ter in the Madison Avenue Presbyterian Church and Associate Pro- 
fessor in Union Theological Seminary, New York City. New Haven: 
Yale University Press. 212 pages. $1.50 net. 

This is the Forty-fourth Series of the Lyman Beecher Lectureship on 
Preaching in Yale University, being the 1918 lecture. It is one of the 
prophetic utterances of the hour. The lecturer faces the situation of the 
world and the Church and addresses himself to a constructive study of 
the task on hand and of the ways and means of undertaking it. The eight 
lectures are : ' ' The Day and the Church ; ' ' l ' The Ministry of Reconcilia- 
tion ; ' ' ■ * The Ministry of Evangelism ; ' ' " The Ministry of Worship ; ' ' 
' ' The Ministry of Teaching ; " l ' The Ministry of Organization ; ' ' ' ' The 
Ministry of Friendship ; ' ' and i * Ministers For the Day. ' ' Every one of 
the lectures reaches well up toward the high mark set for sermons by Phil- 
lips Brooks in one of the early lectures of this lectureship when he said, 
' ' The best sermon for the time is your best utterance for the time. 
These lectures are "best utterances for the time. " 


"The greatest need of our generation is that of 
apostles of reconciliation." — JOHN R. MOTT. 




r T 1 HERE must come a Christian agnosticism 
J- in the face of ultimate problems, which we 
can never solve, to drive us away from our cheap 
explanations until the whole church finds a vital 
faith in God and the power of a crucified love 
'-these are the paths to a united Christendom, 
exceeding in importance every other field of re- 
search and presenting a task exceeding in great- 
ness anything ever undertaken before by man. 

I JANUARY, 1919 


Seminary House, Baltimore, Md., U. S. A. 


Fleming H. Revell Company, New York 

Christian Board of Publication, St. Louis 

Marnzen Company, Ltd., Tokyo, Osaka, Kyoto, Fukuoka and Sendai 

Oliphants, Ltd., 21 Paternoster Square, London, E. C. 4; 100, Princes Street, Edinburgh 



A Journal in the Interest of Peace in the Divided Church of 
Christ. It is issued in January, April, July and October. 


Vol. VIII. JANUARY, 1919 No. 3 



The Philadelphia Conference 9 


CHURCH. W. H. Griffith Thomas 15 

Lehman 32 


The Divided Church and the Present Crisis. Henry C. 
Armstrong 40 




TIONAL and is the servant of the whole Church, irrespective of name or 
creed. It offers! its pages as a forum to the entire Church of! Christ for a 
frank and courteous discussion of those problems that have to do with 
the healing of our unchristian divisions. Its readers are in all Communions. 

SUBSCRIPTION PRICE, $1.00 a year— twenty-five cents a copy. Remit- 
tance should be made by New York draft, express order or money order. 

UNION QUARTERLY, Seminary House, Baltimore, Md., U. S. A. 

Entered as second-class matter in the Post Office at St. Louis, Mo. 

Organizations for the Promotion of Christian Unity 

Having its inception in the work of Thomas Campbell, 1809, present or- 
ganization 1910, President, Rev. Peter Ainslie; Secretary, Rev. H. C. Arm- 
strong, Seminary House, Baltimore, Md., U. S. A. For intercessory prayer, 
friendly conferences and distribution of irenic literature, "till we all attain 
unto the unity of the faith. " Pentecost Sunday is the day named for 
special prayers for and sermons on Christian unity in all Churches. 

TENDOM, 1857, President, Athelstan Riley, Esq., 2 Kensington Court, 
London; Secretary in the United States, Rev. Calbraith Bourn Perry, Cam- 
bridge, N. Y. For intercessory prayer for the reunion of the Roman Cath- 
olic, Greek and Anglican Communions. 

Rev. Robert W. Weir, Edinburgh. For maintaining, fostering and ex- 
pressing the consciousness of the underlying unity that is shared by many 
members of the different Churches in Scotland. 

CHRISTIAN UNITY FOUNDATION, 1910, President, Rt. Rev. Freder- 
ick Courtney, office, 143 E. 37th St., New York. For the promotion of 
Christian unity throughout the world by research and conference. 

CHURCHMEN'S UNION, 1896, President, Prof. Percy Gardner; Hon. 
Secretary, Rev. C. Moxon, 3 St. George's Square, London S. W., England. 
For cultivation of friendly relations between the Church of England and 
all other Christian bodies. 

DER, 1910, President, Rt. Rev. Charles P. Anderson; Secretary, Robert H. 
Gardiner, Esq., Gardiner, Me., U. S. A. For a world conference of all 
Christians relative to the unity of Christendom. 


1908, President, Rev. Frank Mason North; Secretary, Rev. Charles S. Mac- 
farland, 105 E. 22d St., New York. For the cooperation of the various 
Protestant Communions in service rather than an attempt to unite upon 
definitions of theology and polity. 

OF ENGLAND, 1895, President, Rev. Principal W. B. Selbie, Mansfield 
College, Oxford; Secretary, Rev. F. B. Meyer, Memorial Hall, E. C, Lon- 
don. For facilitating fraternal intercourse and cooperation among the 
Evangelical Free Churches in England. 

FREE CHURCH FELLOWSHIP, 1911, Rev. Malcolm Spencer, Colue 
Bridge House, Rickmansworth, London, N. For the cultivation of cor- 
porate prayer and thought for a new spiritual fellowship and communion 
with all branches of the Christian Church. 


A World Conference on Faith and Order, time and place not 
yet named. 

At the instance of the Association for the Promotion of 
Christian Unity, Pentecost Sunday has been named primarily as 
the day for special sermons on Christian unity in all Churches, 
along with prayers to that end. 

At the instance of the Commission of the Protestant 
Episcopal Church on the World Conference on Faith and 
Order, January 18-25, 1919 (January 5-12, Eastern Calendar) 
has been named as the Week of Prayer for Christian unity. 
Suggestions to that end may be secured from Robert H. Gar- 
diner, Secretary, Gardiner, Me. 

A conference on the organic union of the evangelical commun- 
ions of America will be held at a place and time to be desig- 
nated later, perhaps in November or December of 1919. For 
particulars write Rev. W. H. Roberts, D.D., Witherspoon Build- 
ing, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Bibliography of Christian Unity 

THE BOOKS included in this list are by Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Roman 
Catholics, Congregationalists, Unitarians, Lutherans, Baptists, Disciples of Christ, etc. 

CHRISTIAN UNION, Van Dyke, Appleton, 1885 $1.00 

CHRISTIAN UNION, Garrison, St. Louis, Christian Board of Publication, 

1906 , 1.00 

CHRISTIAN UNION IN EFFORT, Firth, Philadelphia, Lippincott, 1911.. 1.50 

Co., 1913 2/6 

CHRISTIAN UNITY, Briggs, Scribner, 1900 1.00 

CHRISTIAN UNITY AT WORK, Macfarland, Federal Council 1.00 

CHURCH DIVISIONS AND CHRISTIANITY, Grane, Macmillan, 1916.... 2.00 


Young, Chicago, The Christian Century Co., 1904 1.00 

HOW TO PROMOTE CHRISTIAN UNION, Kershner, Cincinnati, The 

Standard Publishing Co., 1916 1.00 

LECTURES ON THE REUNION OF THE CHURCH, Dollinger, Dodd, 1872 1.50 

land. 5 Vols 5.00 


Christian Century Co , , 50 


Scribner, 1908 1.00 


RELIGIOUS SYSTEMS OF THE WORLD, London, Swan Sonnenschein & 

Co., 1908 

RESTATEMENT AND REUNION, Streeter, Macmillan, 1914 75 


1895 1.25 

DOM, Tarner, London, Elliott Stock, 1895 

THAT THEY ALL MAY BE ONE, Wells, Funk & Wagnalls Co., 1905 75 

THAT THEY ALL MAY BE ONE, Whyte, Armstrong, 1907 25 

THE CHRISTIAN SYSTEM, Campbell, St. Louis, Christian Board of Pub- 
lication, 1890 1.00 

THE CHURCH AND RELIGIOUS UNITY, Kelly, Longmans, 1913 1.50 

THE CHURCHES OF THE FEDERAL COUNCIL, Macfarland, Revell.... 1.00 

THE LARGER CHURCH, Lanier, Fredericksburg, Va 1.25 

THE LEVEL PLAN FOR CHURCH UNION, Brown, Whittaker, 1910 1.50 

THE MEANING OF CHRISTIAN UNITY, Cobb, Crowell, 1915 1.25 


CHURCH, Ainslie, Revell, 1913 1.00 

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF RELIGIOUS SECTS, McComas, Revell, 1912.... 1.25 

mans, 1911 75 

delphia. American Sunday-School Union, 1915 75 


1895 , 2.50 


Harnack, Macmillan, 1899 1.00 

UNITY AND MISSIONS, Brown, Revell, 1915 1.50 

WHAT MUST THE CHURCH DO TO BE SAVED? Simms, Revell, 1913.. 1.50 


(Membership in this League is open to all Christians — Greek, Roman, Angli- 
can and Protestant, the only requirement being a notice by post card or let- 
ter of one's desire to be so enrolled, stating the Church of which he is a 
member. Address, Association for the Promotion of Christian Unity, Sem- 
inary House, 504 N. Fulton Ave., Baltimore, Md., U. S. A.) 



By Robert H. Gardiner 


"This is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and 
Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." 8. John, 17:3. 

The Christian Faith is that knowledge, the act of the whole man, 
mind and heart and soul and, above all, of will, by which he grasps and 
makes his own the fact of God Incarnate. 

"Now faith may be thus understood; it is that power by which a 
man gives himself up to anything, seeks, wills, adheres to, and unites with 
it, so that his life lives in it, and belongs to it. Now to whatever the soul 
gives itself up; whatever it hungereth after; and in which it delights, and 
seeks to be united; there, and there only, is its faith; that faith which can 
work either life or death, and according to which faith, everything is, and 
must be done to man." — William Law. 

Thus the Christian Faith is the sharing in the one Life of God In- 
carnate in the Person of the Son in Jesus, born of the Virgin Mary. But 
if we truly share in that one Life, we shall be truly one and by our unity 
shall manifest to the world its Redeemer. 

Hence a divided Christianity is incomplete, impotent, false, and the 
world remains in ignorance and darkness and sin. 


Christianity is Love, God Who is Love manifested in the Person of the 
Son Incarnate in Jesus born of the Virgin Mary. 

Love is unity, the utter abandonment of the divisiveness of self. 

Self is the principle which dwarfs a man and shrinks his soul into a dry 
leaf blown hither and thither at the sport of the wind. 

Love is the principle which lifts a man out of and above himself and 
opens to Him the possibility of growth. 

As by true love man is fulfilled, finding at last his completeness in 
dwelling in his beloved, so our love for Christ opens to us the Way toward 
the measure of the fullness of His stature. 

So in that deepest love which is Christ abiding in us and we in Him, 
we find Him the Life, one, yet infinite in diversity, and giving ourselves 
utterly to Him we manifest to the world His Will, one because it is in- 
fill it' life for all men everywhere. 


W. H. Griffith Thomas 

received the degree of Doctor of Divinity from Oxford University. 
He was rector of St. Paul's, Portman Square, London. He left there 
in 1905 to become principal of Wycliffe Hall, Oxford, and in 1910 he 
went to Canada as professor in Wycliffe College, where he first taught 
Old Testment literature and exegesis and later systematic theology. He 
delivered the Reinecker Lectures at the Virginia Theological Seminary 
in 1902. He is a regular contributor to The Sunday School Times and 
an author of numerous books which have had a wide reading. 

J. B. Lehman 

is the president of the Southern Institute, Edwards, Mississippi. 
During the last twenty-five years he has written extensively on re- 
ligious and social problems, his contributions frequently appearing 
as editorials in Southern state papers. He has espoused the negro's 
cause and has proven himself a friend to that race. 

Henry C. Armstrong 

is an alumnus of Yale University and is now serving as the secretary 
of the Association for the Promotion of Christian Unity and as 
associate minister of the Christian Temple, Baltimore. He speaks 
frequently on Christian unity in interdenominational gatherings and 
is a contributor to religious journals. 


The favorite figure in which the church of the first century set forth its 
conception of the Spirit of Christianity is that of "the Good Shepherd." 
The emblem which appears on this page is a reproduction of one of 
the early Christian gems. 



"No one has written more appreciatively respecting this symbol 
than Dean Stanley in his Christian Institutions. It appealed to all his 
warmest sympathies. 'What,' he asks, 'is the test or sign of Christian 
popular belief, which in these earliest representations of Christianity 
is handed down to us as the most cherished, the all-sufficing, token of 
their creed? It is very simple, but it contains a great deal. It is 
a shepherd in the bloom of youth, with the crook, or a shepherd 's pipe, 
in one hand, and on his shoulder a lamb, which he carefully carries, and 
holds with the other^ hand. We see at once who it is; we all know with- 
out being told. This, in that earliest chamber, or church of a Chris- 
tian family, is the only sign of Christian life and Christian belief. But, 
as it is almost the only sign of Christian belief in this earliest catacomb, 
so it continues always the chief, always the prevailing sign, as long as 
those burial-places were used.' 

"After alluding to the almost total neglect of this lovely symbol 
by the Fathers and. Theologians, he says that it answers the question, 
what was the popular religion of the first Christians? 'It was, in one 
word, the religion of the Good Shepherd. The kindness, the courage, 
the love, the beauty, the grace, of the Good Shepherd, was to them, if 
we may so say, Prayer Book and Articles, Creed and Canons, all in one. 
They looked on that figure, and it conveyed to them all they wanted. 
As ages passed on, the Good Shepherd faded from the mind of the 
Christian world, and other emblems of the Christian faith have taken 
His place. Instead of the gracious and gentle Pastor, there came the 
Omnipotent Judge, or the crucified Sufferer or the Infant in His mother's 
arms, or the Master in His parting Supper, or the figures of innumerable 
saints and angels, or the elaborate expositions of the various forms of 
theological controversy. ' But 'the Good Shepherd represents to us the 
joyful, cheerful side of Christianity of which we spoke before. . . . 
But that is the primitive conception of the Founder of Christianity in 
those earlier centuries when the first object of the Christian community 
was not to repel/ but to include ; not to condemn, but to save. The popular 
conception of Christ in the early church was of the strong, the joyous 
youth, of eternal growth, of immortal grace.' " — Frederic W. Farrar in 
The Life of Christ as Represented in Art. 


A leveling uniformity is neither possible nor desir- 
able. In social intercourse we respect individuality of 
our friends and accept them as they are, and feel as- 
sured of their affection and regard in spite of our 
shortcomings and oddities. We should be able to have 
the same respect for the forms of worship, the methods 
of organization and the doctrinal convictions which 
have been endeared to our religious kinsmen by genera- 
tions of experience. The more we mingle on a basis of 
equality and good will and practical cooperation, the 
better will the assimilating forces of the common spirit 
of Christ be able to do their work silently weeding out 
what is non-Christian or obsolete. Actual fellowship 
alone can furnish an enduring basis for any efforts at 
formal union which will be made by us or our children. 
— Walter Rausch&ribiisch. 

As a venture, while everything else is advancing in price, THE 
CHRISTIAN UNION QUARTERLY is reduced from two dollars 
to one dollar a year, beginning with this number. It is hoped 
that every subscriber will seek to secure another reader. 


Vol. VIII. JANUARY, 1919 No. 3 



A new chapter in Christian unity in American Christi- 
anity was opened by the recent conference on organic 
union of the evangelical churches of America, held at 
the invitation of the General Assembly of the Presby- 
terian Church in the U. S. A. in the Witherspoon build- 
ing, Philadelphia, December the fourth and fifth. This 
conference came together without the slightest awk- 
wardness and seemed to have been the fine expression 
of the logical conclusion of the Christian thinking of the 
last decade. A ripeness of fellowship pervaded every 

Many things have occurred in the last decade to 
awaken interest in Christian unity, both in America and 
among other nations. Among those that have been the 
most outstanding in America are the creating of the 
Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America 
in 1908; the establishment in the summer of 1910 of 
the Protestant Episcopal Christian Unity Foundation 
for research and conferences; the appointment in the 
fall of 1910 of the Protestant Episcopal commission on 



the World Conference on Faith and Order; the estab- 
lishing at the same time of the Disciples' Association for 
the Promotion of Christian Unity by intercessory prayer, 
friendly conferences and distribution of irenic literature ; 
likewise at the same time the appointment of the Con- 
gregational committee on comity and unity; while the 
Presbyterians already had a standing committee on 
church cooperation and union. All these organizations 
and other local organizations have been actively at work, 
creating an atmosphere and awakening a desire for 
Christian unity. Then came the European war, revealing 
the impotency of a divided church to meet world con- 
ditions and at the same time when chaplains and Y. M. C. 
A. forces got to work in the trenches of war it was further 
revealed that the divisions of Christendom were petty 
and superficial by the side of great world tasks. The im- 
mediate call, however, of the Philadelphia conference, 
came from the Eev. George E. Hunt, a Presbyterian min- 
ister of Madison, Wisconsin. He aroused the interest 
of several presbyteries in his state and these sent dele- 
gates to the Presbyterian General Assembly last spring 
in Columbus, Ohio, with such enthusiasm for Christian 
unity that the Assembly forthwith issued a call for the 
conference amid a storm of enthusiasm that has been 
rarely excelled in that gathering. 

Inasmuch as the conference was named to meet in 
1918, there was not much time for the developing of 
plans as originally purposed. Some of the communions 
having quadrennial conventions and others being called 
off by the influenza epidemic, it was decided to make this 
call for the first conference to the commissions and com- 
mittees of the various evangelical churches and then to 
plan for the larger and more representative conference 
a year hence, when the national gatherings could elect 
their representatives. In spite of this hindrance there 
were sixteen communions represented as follows : North- 


ern Baptists by five representatives ; Congregationalists 
by fourteen ; Disciples of Christ by fifteen ; Evangelicals 
by five ; Friends by thirteen ; United Lutherans by five ; 
Methodists by sixteen; Moravians by three; Presbyte- 
rians by twenty-eight; Episcopalians by twenty-three; 
Eef ormed Church in America by one ; Reformed Church 
in the U. S. by seven ; United Brethren by two ; United 
Presbyterians by five ; and Welsh Presbyterians by two, 
making nearly one hundred and fifty and exceeding these 
figures by visitors. 

The Eev. Wm. H. Roberts, D.D., chairman of the 
Presbyterian commission, which was the convener of 
the conference, presided over the first session and di- 
rected with his parliamentary skill the whole conference. 
The various communions presented in brief statements 
their views on organic union as follows: Disciples of 
Christ, the United Presbyterians by the Rev. W. M. 
Anderson, D.D., the Friends by Mr. George M. "Warner, 
the Moravians by Bishop C. L. Moench, D.D., the Bap- 
tists by the Rev. Cornelius Woelfkin, D.D., the Congre- 
gationalists by Professor Williston Walker, D.D., the 
Episcopalians by the Rt. Rev. Ethelbert Talbot, D.D., the 
Methodists by Bishop John W. Hamilton, D.D., the Re- 
formed Church by the Rev. Rufus W. Miller, D.D., the 
Evangelicals by the Rev. John F. Baltzer, D.D., the 
United Lutherans by the Rev. H. A. Weller, D.D., and the 
Welsh Presbyterians by the Rev. R. E. Williams, closing 
that session with a most illuminating address on "The 
Historical Significance of Denominationalism'' by the 
Rev. George W. Richards, D.D. Bishop Philip M. Rhine- 
lander, D.D., and the Rev. Edgar DeWitt Jones., D.D., 
presided over sessions in the Wither spoon building and 
Bishop Joseph S. F. Berry, D.D., presided at the evening 
meeting at Calvary Presbyterian Church when stirring 
addresses were made by the Rt. Rev. Thomas F. Gailor, 
chairman of the House of Bishops of the Protestant 


Episcopal Church, the Eev. C. E. Burton, D.D., general 
secretary of Home Missions of the Congregational 
churches and the Rev. J. Frank Smith, D.D., moderator 
of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in 
the U. S. A. The Rev. Joachim Alexopoulos of the 
Eastern Orthodox Church spoke for closer cooperation 
among Christians, especially in educational and social 
matters. A luncheon at noon and a dinner in the evening 
furnished another opportunity for speech making. In 
all the sessions the men who spoke had their faces turned 
to the future and the spirit of the meetings was free, 
cordial and irenic. 

Two of the most outstanding men of the conference 
were the Rev. Newman Smyth, D.D., and the Rev. Wm. 
H. Roberts, D.D., — both exceeding three score years, but 
both as active as men ten years their junior ; both theo- 
logians, Dr. Smyth of the liberal school and Dr. Roberts 
of the conservatives ; both having rendered long service 
in their respective communions, Dr. Smyth for twenty- 
five years minister at Center Congregational Church, 
New Haven, and Dr. Roberts the stated clerk of the Gen- 
eral Assembly of the Presbyterian Church since 1884 
and American secretary of the World Presbyterian Alli- 
ance since 1888 ; both were appointed by the Protestant 
Episcopal Church on the deputation to Great Britain and 
Ireland in 1913 in the interest of the World Conference 
on Faith and Order ; both have stood for Christian unity, 
Dr. Smyth has been untiring in his efforts for organic 
union and Dr. Roberts presided over the first meeting 
of the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in 
America in its first session in Philadelphia in 1908 and 
has been especially active in federation work; both men 
were deeply moved by the prophetic note sounded in the 
recent Philadelphia conference and their messages were 
received with cordial appreciation. They both stood out 
as the prophets and apostles of reconciliation. 


The close of the conference was marked by the unan- 
imous adoption of the following resolutions which had 
been carefully framed by the business committee: 

"That the members of this conference from each communion be asked 
as soon as possible to appoint representatives on an ad interim committee 
to cany forward the movement toward organic union. 

The committee shall be composed of one member from each commun- 
ion, and one additional member for each 500,000 communicants or fraction 

The same privilege of membership on the committee shall be extended 
to evangelical denominations not represented here. 

The members of the committee appointed by the Presbyterian Church 
in the U. S. A. are asked to act as the nucleus and convener of the com- 

This committee shall be charged with these duties: 

Develop and use at its discretion agencies and methods for discovering 
and creating interest in the subject of organic union throughout the churches 
of the country. 

Make provision for presenting, by personal delegations, or otherwise, 
to the national bodies of all the evangelical communions of the United 
States urgent invitations to participate in an interdenominational council 
on organic union. 

Lay before the bodies thus approached the steps necessary for the 
holding of such council, including the plan and basis of representation 
and the date of the council, which shall be as early as possible, and in any 
event not later than 1920. 

To prepare for presentation to such council when it shall assemble a 
suggested plan or plans of organic union. ' ' 

The enthusiasm on the adoption of this tentative 
programme was warm and deep. The fine spirit of the 
Philadelphia conference will help toward the larger con- 
ference now being planned, as well as toward the World 
Conference on Faith and Order to come later. The 
church must either fail at her task or get together in the 
name of Jesus Christ our common Lord and Saviour. 
She revolts at the mere suggestion of the first and the 
evidences are overwhelming that the possibilities of a 
united Protestantism are at hand to be followed by a 
united church throughout the world, including all who ac- 
cept Jesus as the Christ and the Saviour of the world. 


By W. H. Griffith Thomas, D.D., Professor of Systematic Theology, 

Wycliffe College, Toronto 

When the editor invited me to contribute an article on 
church union I felt I could not do better than present 
to the readers of this magazine a view of priesthood in 
the Episcopal Church which could be compared, or 
rather contrasted, with that given by Dr. F. J. Hall in 
the July number of The Quarterly. No one could rec- 
ognize from that article that any different, still less dif- 
fering view, obtains in the Episcopal Church, and yet 
I, as an attached member of the Church of England, am 
about to state a conception of episcopacy diametrically 
opposed to that of Dr. Hall. And I am compelled to say 
that it is no question of complement, but of contradiction, 
for if he is right I am wrong, while if I am right he is 

I am glad of this opportunity of expressing what I 
believe, on Scriptural and historical grounds, to be the 
proper view of priesthood for which the Episcopal 
Church stands. I shall be compelled to call attention 
mainly to points omitted by Dr. Hall, but which are 
needed in any thorough consideration of "the doctrine 
of priesthood in the Episcopal Church." 

I start with a reference to the Eeformation, the bear- 
ings of which, so far as I can see, were not mentioned 
or even implied in Dr. Hall's article. And yet some- 
thing, whether for good or ill, actually took place in the 
sixteenth century which ever since has seriously af- 
fected the Episcopal Church and its view of the ministry. 

As the Episcopal Church lays down the great prin- 



ciple in Article VI of the supremacy of Scripture, it 
is natural to refer, first of all, to the conception of minis- 
try found in the New Testament, and in the words of 
Bishop Lightfoot 's epoch-making essay, "the kingdom 
of Christ * * * has no sacerdotal system.' ' The en- 
tire absence of sacerdotal language in connection with 
the New Testament is what Lightfoot calls "the elo- 
quent silence of the apostolic writings." This silence, 
as the bishop goes on to point out, is a mark of the 
uniqueness of Christianity in relation to other religions. 
It is the "characteristic distinction of Christianity." 

Lightfoot, also remarks that the "progress of the 
sacerdotal view of the ministry is one of the most strik- 
ing and important phenomena in the history of the Chris- 
tian Church," and he traces "the gradual departure 
from the apostolic teaching in the encroachment of the 
sacerdotal on the pastoral and ministerial view of the 
clergy," until it culminated in Cyprian to whom we owe 
first the clear teaching which regards the ministry as es- 
sentially sacerdotal. It is not necessary to consider the 
ministry between the time of Cyprian and the Reforma- 
tion except to say that the sacerdotal idea gradually be- 
came stronger until it dominated the entire church. This, 
however, only sets in more marked contrast the follow- 
ing salient facts connected with the Church of England 
at the Eeformation. 

The first point of importance is found in a careful 
comparison of the Anglican Ordinal with the Roman 
Pontifical. Of seven particulars in the latter, only one 
now remains: the words "Receive ye the Holy Ghost," 
etc. It is striking that the Church of England retains 
these words, especially since it is now known that they 
are not to be found in any ordinal before the thirteenth 
century. Bishop Andrewes holds that they refer to func- 
tion and not to internal quality, the interpretation being 
given in the words that immediately follow: "And be 


thou a faithful dispenser of the Word and Sacraments. ' f 
The fact that this Scriptural passage is retained in the 
Anglican Ordinal makes the rejection of the other six 
numbers all the more significant. The doctrinal mean- 
ing of the Anglican ministry is thus made quite clear, 
and all the formularies and representative writers bear 
witness to the entire removal of mediaeval sacerdotal- 
ism, thereby causing a doctrinal gulf between the Church 
of Rome and ourselves. It is not surprising that Rome 
rejects Anglican Orders as invalid because they must 
of necessity be null and void until Anglicanism is one 
with Rome on the eucharistic sacrifice. Further, nothing 
could be more full of meaning than the deliberate re- 
moval from the Anglican Ordinal of the giving of the 
sacramental vessels to the newly ordained, and with this 
the omission of the words said at the same time: "Take 
thou authority to offer sacrifice for the living and the 

The next significant point is the entire omission of the 
term "altar" from the formularies of the Church of 
England. It is well known that the first Reformed 
Prayer Book of 1549 retained the word, but it was re- 
moved in 1552, and has never been re-introduced. It 
is found in one of the additional services of the Amer- 
ican Prayer Book, but is still absent from the English 
book. The action of the reforming bishops was in ac- 
cordance with this omission, for in the reign of Edward 
VI altars were removed and tables substituted. The 
explanation is quite simple. An altar involves a sac- 
rifice, while a table implies a feast. An altar can be a 
table (Mai. 1:12), but a table can never be an altar. 

And yet after all these omissions the Anglican 
Church retains the word "priest," Why is this? 
The English word has to do duty for two different sets 
of ideas and terms, Tr/oeo-^repos, elder or presbyter, and 
Upevs, priest. Lightfoot calls attention to the significant 


fact that in those languages which have only one word 
to express the two ideas this word etymologically rep- 
resents " presbyter" and not "sacerdos," e.g., French, 
pretre; German, priest er; English, priest. This shows 
that the sacerdotal idea was imported not original. But 
which of these two ideas was intended by the Prayer 
Book? It is a question of fact and must be tested by all 
the information available. These are the main consid- 
erations : 

(a) The significant changes in the communion serv- 
ice of 1552 show an entire absence of everything sacer- 
dotal and sacrificial. 

(b) The ordinal of 1662 is described as "the form 
and manner of ordering of bishops, presbyters and dea- 
cons.' ' The late regius professor of divinity at Oxford, 
Dr. Ince, said that the term "priest" is but "the English 
for presbyter writ small, and substantially corresponds 
to the pastors and teachers of primitive times. ' ' To the 
same effect are the words of Hooker: "Whether we call 
it a priesthood or presbytership or a ministry it skilleth 

(c) In harmony with this the Latin version of the 
Prayer Book made in 1670, a few years after 1672, and 
almost an official production, renders the term, "pres- 
byterus. ' ' 

(d) The word "priest" is frequently interchanged 
with "minister" as may be seen from several rubrics 
in the English Prayer Book, where no sacerdotal is 

(e) In Article XXXII, while the title speaks of the 
"marriage of priests" and uses the Latin "sacerdo- 
tum," doubtless referring to the Eoman Catholic cus- 
tom, the Article itself refers to the three orders as "bish- 
ops, presbyters and deacons." 

(f) Nor is it possible to overlook the significance 
of the change of usage in the verse from Psalm 132 :16, 


from "let thy priests be clothed" to "endue thy min- 

(g) The Eoman Church, as we have seen, gives the 
power "to offer sacrifices," but this, as Dr. Ince has 
pointed out, "is not one of the powers * * * com- 
mitted to the Anglican priest." He goes on to remark 
that the Eeformers had been accustomed to the phrase- 
ology of the Sarm Ordinal and that ' ' it cannot have been 
without significance that no counterpart to these expres- 
sions notwithstanding is found in the Reformed Ordi- 
nal. Our Reformers must have held the view which 
Hooker unhesitatingly asserted 'that sacrifice is now no 
part of the Christian ministry.' " 


But it is nevertheless said that the use of John 20 :22, 
23, in the Ordinal carries with it sacerdotal authority and 
functions. Dr. Pusey was accustomed to say that the 
confessional was built up on these words. But it is 
now almost universally admitted that these words were 
spoken to the whole church as there represented, and 
from St. John's account of the great commission found 
in all the Gospels. And when we turn to Acts we find 
that this alone was the work they did. Besides, private 
confession and absolution were unknown for centuries 
and, as already remarked, these words were not in any 
ordinal until the thirteenth century, while even then they 
did not form part of the essential words of ordination. 
There is also some confusion in regarding these words 
as implying a sacerdotal priesthood. A priest is one 
who represents man to God (Heb. 5 :1), just as a prophet 
is one who represents God to man (Exod. 7:1). Now as 
the passage in St. John clearly refers to a message, and 
to a messenger from God to man, this is the work of a 
prophet not of a priest, and for this reason, to speak of 
"priestly absolution" is really a contradiction in terms, 


since the Old Testament priest never absolved, and abso- 
lution, as a message from God to man, is the work of the 
prophet not the priest. 

For these reasons it is urged, in the light of history, 
that the Prayer Book "priest" is synonymous with 
"presbyter" and corresponds to the prophet declaring 
the will of God. The action of the Anglican Church at 
the Eeformation ought to be sufficient to show its mind 
on the meaning of these words. It may also be pointed 
out that the words are not found in the Greek Ordinal 
to-day so that clearly they are not essential to holy or- 
ders, and their meaning in our own Ordinal can be il- 
lustrated from representative churchmen through the 
last three centuries. 

It is, therefore, quite impossible to suppose, because 
the Anglican Church has continued the three orders of 
ministry, that therefore they must necessarily possess 
the same sacerdotal functions as obtained in the Middle 
Ages. There are bishops, priests and deacons, but the 
priests are not "sacerdotes." The Bishop of Oxford 
(Dr. Gore) admits that sacerdotal terms are only found 
at the end of the second century, and Bishop Morton, 
in his reply to Bellarmine, very forcibly said that if the 
terms "priest," "sacrifice," and "altar," had been es- 
sential to the Christian ministry they would not and 
could not have been concealed by the apostles. 

When we turn to the ministry as actually seen in 
the Anglican Prayer Book and Articles it is essentially 
ministerial and concerned with pastoral work. There is 
nothing sacerdotal in anything provided for the ministry 
in our church. He is a prophet from God to the people, 
not a sacrificing or mediating priest in the old Jewish 
or medieval meaning of the term. 

The studied breadth and generality of statements in 
the Articles, concerning the ministry, is recognized by 
all, and it is significant that amidst the intense contro- 


versies of the sixteenth century the terminology of these 
Articles was never modified. Bishop Gibson, a well- 
known English high churchman, in his work on the Arti- 
cles, fully recognizes the fact that these documents i ' are 
remarkably silent even when they might have been rea- 
sonably expected to shed some light on the episcopacy. ' ■ 
This breadth of view is in entire harmony with the well 
known attitude of Cranmer towards non-episcopal Re- 
formers in his day. But Gibson argues that the silence 
of the Articles is not of any particular moment in view 
of the fact that we have the deliberate judgment of the 
Church of England in the preface to the Ordinal where 
reference is made to the orders of bishops, priests and 
deacons, and the requirement of these orders for min- 
istry is clearly stated. On this matter several important 
points call for attention. 

(a) The opening sentence of the paragraph comes 
from the pen of Cranmer, who was in constant fellow- 
ship with non-episcopalians, and this, together with the 
wording of the preface which associates Scripture with 
ancient authors in a very different fashion from the in- 
sistence on the supremacy of Scripture in Article VI, 
seems to show that while our Reformers naturally main- 
tained the episcopacy which they themselves possessed, 
they did not by word or deed intend to " unchurch' ' 
other Reformers who for any reason did not possess 

(b) In harmony with this the first rubric in the or- 
dering of deacons and priests is significant, for while a 
sermon is required in each case, showing the necessity 
of deacons and presbyters, there is no such rubric stating 
the necessity of bishops. 

(c) It is well known that Cranmer, the author of 
nearly the whole of the entire paragraph, expressly main- 
tains that presbyters and bishops were originally iden- 
tical, and that the development which made them distinct 


and gave bishops rule over presbyters was of human 
origin. It is hardly likely that Cranmer, the main mover 
in preparing these offices, would intend by this statement 
an entirely different view of episcopacy. 

(d) There are other considerations which could eas- 
ily be added to support these contentions as to the proper 
interpretation of this preface. But there are some sig- 
nificant facts in English Church history which call for 
special attention. It is well known that Cranmer endeav- 
ored to effect a union with the non-episcopal Reformers, 
and our Articles on the church and ministry are a stand- 
ing testimony to his view. His close association with 
men like Peter Martyr and Martin Bucer confirm this 
position. The correspondence between Anglican divines 
and those of the Swiss Church in the time of Elizabeth 
indicates a fundamental unity of doctrinal view, and the 
earliest books on the Articles by Rogers and Burnet 
plainly state the same fundamental agreement. The 
evidence of Rogers as the chaplain of Bancroft, Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury, who himself saw and approved of 
the book, is particularly noteworthy. 

It is also well known that in 1570 an act was passed 
making it easy for men in Presbyterian orders to hold 
livings in the English Church, and in 1580 the English 
Church authorities allowed a community of Huguenots 
to have a service in Canterbury Cathedral, which re- 
mains to the present day. In 1603 a canon, ordering the 
Bidding Prayer, included a reference to the Church of 
Scotland, which at the time was Presbyterian, not Epis- 
copalian, for episcopacy was not introduced into Scot- 
land until 1610. Bishop Overall fully recognized Pres- 
byterian orders and admitted Presbyterians into the 
English Church, and Mark Pattison in his "Life of 
Casaubon" says that "before the rise of the Laudian 
school the English Church and the Reformed Churches 
of the continent mutually recognized each other as sis- 


ters." Bishop Cosin's words and actions are particu- 
larly noteworthy because he was so representative a 
high churchman. When in exile in France he kept up a 
friendly intercourse with Protestant ministers and ad- 
vised his friends to communicate when on the continent 
"at the Reformed Church, and not at the Roman altars." 
And in 1650 he wrote "that a minister ordained in the 
French, Church would not be re-ordained when entering 
ours. All that would be required would be the subscrip- 
tion to the Articles." 

There are other testimonies which can easily be ad- 
duced to show that Presbyterians were admitted to full 
pastoral charge and work in the English Church, with- 
out re-ordination, between 1552 and 1662. 

The fact is that the doctrine of "no bishop, no 
church" did not come into the English Church as part 
of the heritage from the medieval Church of Rome; it 
was not heard of for fifty years after the time of Cran- 
mer, and was due solely to the controversy between 
churchmen and Puritans in the closing days of Eliza- 
beth. Dr. Pocock, a well-known English high church 
historian, wrote that the "belief in the apostolic succes- 
sion in the episcopate is not to be found in any of the 
writings of the Elizabethan bishops," and Keble, in his 
preface to Hooker, takes exactly the same line. This 
was the prevailing view of the Church of England down 
to the Oxford Movement, and the present isolation of 
the Anglican Church and the Protestant Episcopal 
Church dates from that time. All this may be summed 
up in the words of Dr. Sanday: 

' ' It should be distinctly borne in mind that the more 
sweeping refusal to recognize the non-episcopal Re- 
formed Churches is not and can never be made a doctrine 
of the Church of England. Too many of her most repre- 
sentative men have no share in it. Hooker did not hold 
it; Andrewes expressly disclaimed it; Cosin freely com- 


municated with the French Eeformed Church during his 
exile. Indeed it is not until the last half of the present 
century that more than a relatively small minority of 
English churchmen have been added to it." (Conception 
of Priesthood, p. 95.) 

A full and long catena of authorities can be adduced 
in support of the position which is now maintained, and 
if representative men are of any account in a matter of 
this kind, the mind of the church is revealed beyond all 
question. The same attitude is characteristic of the 
Protestant Episcopal Church. The preface to the Prayer 
Book refers to the failure at the attempt of reunion in 
1689, and then states what was proposed in 1789. Bish- 
ops White, Provoost and Madison were men of a broad, 
moderate type, and there can be no question as to the 
real mind of the church in its earliest days. As to the 
reference to the service of institution the question still 
remains as to what ' ' sacerdotal functions ? ' are intended. 
There are two criteria. They can be interpreted: (1) by 
the actual requirements of the Prayer Book; and (2) by 
an appeal of the preface to essential agreement with the 
Church of England, and about the views of that church 
there is no real question. 


In the present day the subject of the Christian min- 
istry has become involved in the controversy due to the 
Tractarian Movement, since which time there have been 
two views in the Church of England: One insists upon 
ministerial succession through the episcopate as a per- 
manent fact and as the only guarantee of grace. But it 
is a simple matter of history that this view was not held 
in the Anglican Church before Tractarian times by any 
really representative churchman of importance. The 
other view accepts the fact of succession, but re- 
fuses to make it essential to the existence of the church 


and sacraments. This is the view held in substance by 
men from Hooker down to the present day, and even 
Land did not reject the validity of non-episcopal ordina- 
tion. Now it is clear that these two views are not com- 
plementary but contradictory, and until the Episcopal 
Church really settles which is correct it cannot speak 
with a clear and certain voice on the subject of the min- 
istry. As the New Testament gives no directions in re- 
gard to the exact divisions of the functions of the min- 
istry, or the form which the ministry was to take in the 
future, it is obvious that anything which is not absolutely 
settled by the New Testament cannot be of the esse of 
the church, however necessary it may be thought for 
due order. Continuity is valuable and no one wishes to 
destroy it or minimize its importance, but it is quite an- 
other thing to make grace depend on the outward laying 
on of hands. 

The problem of the ministry is inevitably connected 
with the fact that in the present day, and for a long 
time past, non-episcopal churches have been abundantly 
blessed in spiritual results. Not only so, but in most of 
the dependencies of the British Empire the Anglican 
Church is by no means first, either in numbers or in 
influence; while in the United States it is somewhere 
about seventh in number. When we turn to the mission 
field the proportions are often still more disadvanta- 
geous to the Anglican communion. How then are we to 
account for these facts, and explain the marvellous de- 
velopments in churches which have no episcopate at all? 
To ordinary observers it would seem the height of ab- 
surdity that by a theory of apostolic succession millions 
of the most intelligent and devoted followers of Christ 
are to be regarded as not normally part of the true 
catholic church. With a curious inconsistency, surpris- 
ing in so acute a thinker, the Bishop of Oxford speaks in 
the warmest terms of the presence of the Holy Spirit 


in non-episcopal churches, and yet in the same breath 
speaks of their " rebellion. ' ' If the presence of the Holy 
Spirit is so manifest among these non-episcopal Chris- 
tians, it is difficult, if not impossible, to see how they can 
be "rebellious" against the will of God. 

The term valid is often used, and the natural inquiry 
is : Valid for what ? The Archbishop of Canterbury has 
recently said that he always avoids this term, and many 
will feel that to speak of validity or invalidity is to refer 
to something which no one can settle, unless he takes 
the impossible position of insisting that there can be no 
grace without episcopal ordination. All this and much 
more that could be said shows that the problem of non- 
episcopal churches is not so simple as is sometimes 
thought. The exclusive Anglican view came in with 

One special illustration of this question of episcopal 
and non-episcopal churches is seen in the now well-known 
incident of the conference at Kikuyu in 1913. As a re- 
sult of that free interchange of union and practice be- 
tween episcopal and non-episcopal churches in the mis- 
sion field, the entire question was considered by the Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury, and a decision was made to the 
effect that, while non-episcopal native Christians can 
receive the Holy Communion in Episcopal Churches, 
native Christians of Episcopal Churches are not for the 
present to receive the Sacrament from non-episcopal 
ministers. The Bishops of Uganda and Mombasa have 
loyally agreed to this admittedly one-sided arrangement, 
but many will feel it is sad to read these words which 
were adopted at the second conference held at Kikuyu 
in July last (1918). 

"While earnestly desiring such a measure of unity 
that full intercommunion between the members of the 
allied missions may become possible, we recognize that 


in existing conditions, such intercommnnion between 
episcopal and non-episcopal missions is not yet possible. 
"The bishops of the two dioceses concerned in the 
alliance realise the dangers to which native converts 
are exposed through isolation. They deeply regret that 
it is impossible in the present circumstances to bid the 
members of their church to seek the Holy Communion 
at the hands of ministers not especially ordained. But 
they will be grateful for such spiritual help as it may 
be possible for other missions to give to those who may 
be, for the time, isolated from the ministrations of their 
own church." 

Could anything be more pathetic in its testimony to 
the isolation of the Anglican communion to-day? 

The question of the ministry is also vitally associated 
with the relation of the Anglican Church to that of Eome. 
In certain quarters of the Anglican Church there is a 
strong desire, and there have also been several efforts, 
to obtain recognition of Anglican orders from Eome, 
but each attempt has signally failed. The latest, made 
through Lord Halifax, and several of his friends, a few 
years ago was perhaps the most striking failure of all. 
It is marvellous how people with any self-respect could 
adopt the position towards Rome, shown by some mem- 
bers of the extreme ritualistic party in England. The 
late Archbishop Benson quickly and fully recognized the 
true bearing of the situation and would not allow him- 
self to become a party to the effort to get recognition 
from Eome. It is not surprising that Eome takes the 
stand she does because the Eeformation protest, the 
present character of the Prayer Book, and the history 
of the past three and a half centuries, all indicate that 
the Anglican conception of the ministry is something 
fundamentally different from that of Eome. The latter 
is sacerdotal; the former is not. Some years ago I had 
a long and interesting conversation with a Eoman Cath- 
olic priest, and among other things I asked him what he 


thought of our Prayer Book, and whether it could be in 
any sense used by members of the Eoman Catholic 
Church. With a significant smile he replied "Oh no, 
we regard it as a Protestant book." I replied, "So do 
I." The Church of Kome has a very simple method of 
reunion, namely, absorption into the Eoman system, for 
as Mr. T. Nelson Page once aptly said that the Church of 
Eome spurns any idea of being a sister church, insisting 
that she is nothing else than the mother of churches. 

The relation of the Greek Church to Anglicanism 
amounts practically to the same as that of Eome, namely, 
non-recognition of Anglican orders and the need of re- 
ordination. For several years past there have been many 
occasions for showing friendliness, and there is a soci- 
ety in England which aims at fostering closer relations 
with the Eussian Church. And yet notwithstanding 
many genuine expressions of mutual interest and respect 
the actual position is the same to-day as ever and the 
Greek Church has never officially accepted even Anglican 
baptism, still less Anglican ordination. 


There is no doubt that the key to the situation is 
found in what is known as apostolic succession. If this 
means simply an historical succession, emphasizing the 
corporate and continuous idea as distinct from individ- 
ualism and separatism, no one will quarrel with it. But 
if it means, as it usually does, a ministry descended from 
the apostles by a continuous transmission, as the guar- 
antee of grace, it is foreign to the spirit of Christ, to the 
New Testament, and to the earliest records of church 
history. It took shape in centuries when the world be- 
lieved in the divine right of kings, but these times and 
ideas have passed, and authority is no longer a matter 
of divine right, either of king or in bishop. The apos- 
tles were unique, and the New Testament ministry was 


not originated by devolution from them; it was deter- 
mined by spiritual gifts through the Spirit of God in 
the church. The apostles were not officers or rulers of 
the church, and there is no trace of anything like what 
is now called apostolic succession in the early part of 
the second century. The first link of transmission is 
wanting, and a chain broken, or rather non-existent, in 
its first link is, to put it mildly, not a satisfactory method 
for guaranteeing the grace all this time afterwards. The 
fact is that those who hold apostolic succession are com- 
pelled to make assumptions and to form hypotheses in 
order to obtain what they desire. I will undertake to 
prove the distinctive positions of the evangelical view 
of the ministry from the admissions the Bishop of Ox- 
ford is compelled to make, especially in his book "Orders 
and Unity. " 

From all this it will be evident that what Dr. Hall 
calls the official doctrine of the Episcopal Church, as 
expressed in the Prayer Book, is something wholly dif- 
ferent from his statement of it, and the differences be- 
tween those whom he calls "high," "low," and "broad" 
churchmen are far more and deeper than his expression 
of them. Evangelical churchmen wholly reject every sac- 
erdotal view of the ministry which is not also true of the 
whole church. Dr. Hall's view is that of Moberly over 
again, but it is impossible because it implies a priest- 
hood within the church. Christianity is a religion which 
is, not which has, a priesthood, and in regard to minis- 
try, there is all the difference between a medium and a 

One thing on which I heartily agree with Dr. Hall is 
that "before sacerdotal and anti-sacerdotal communions 
can be united in harmonious religious practice, and in 
interior fellowship, such a disturbing question as priest- 
hood must come to settlement." There is no doubt what- 
ever about this and, as the editor said in the July num- 


ber of this magazine, "the episcopate is not the organ 
of unity" because "there are no wider divisions in Chris- 
tendom to-day than between the three great divisions 
among the episcopate Churches." 

The report recently issued in England by a joint 
committee is very welcome for many reasons, but it is 
significant that it deals almost entirely with generalities, 
and there can be no doubt that any further step would 
have to include the recognition of the validity of the 
non-episcopal ministerial orders. Representative non- 
episcopalians have already made this quite clear. This 
is the only way of reunion, and I am glad to observe that 
evangelical churchmen in England are waking up to it. 
It has long seemed to me that what Cranmer did in the 
sixteenth century Anglicans ought to be able to do in 
the twentieth, namely, retain their own episcopacy and 
yet recognize to the full the non-episcopal ministry 
which God is so abundantly blessing. If I may be al- 
lowed a personal reference, I rejoice in taking every op- 
portunity I can of having fellowship, through preaching 
and the Holy Communion, with members of non-episco- 
pal churches, and I recall with especial pleasure an ex- 
perience of this some months ago in connection with a 
church of the editor's communion in Cleveland, of which 
my good friend, the Rev. J. H. Goldner, is the pastor. 
To meet with my fellow Christians there and to join 
with them in their celebration of the Lord's Supper was 
an unspeakable pleasure and privilege, and I see no rea- 
son why such instances should not be multiplied, as one 
of many ways of recognizing our essential unity in 

The precise method whereby the churches must pro- 
ceed, it may be through federation, to essential union, 
must be left for Christian statesmanship, though I ven- 
ture to think that some such proposal as that outlined 
by Bishop Brown, of Arkansas, in his "Level Plan for 


Church Unity" seems to be the only one within prac- 
tical politics. I entirely agree with the remarks made 
in the July number of this magazine that when the bish- 
ops of the Protestant Episcopal Church declined to re- 
spond to the invitation for a joint ordination of army 
chaplains they not only lost a splendid opportunity, but, 
as the Southern Churchman said, did not represent the 
sentiment of the church at large. Many of us feel the 
truth (severe though it was) of the words of the editor 
of the New York Churchman sometime ago that the 
Episcopal Church has a remarkably fine faculty for 
drawing up prayers for Christian unity. 

I close by stating my respectful but strong convic- 
tion that the view of priesthood set out in Dr. Hall's 
article represents only his own position and that of his 
party, and is in no sense expressive of the Church of 
England, or the Protestant Episcopal Church as a whole, 
when studied in the light of the New Testament, of their 
history since the time of the Reformation, and of the 
patent and potent facts of church life and work to-day. 

W. H. Griffith Thomas. 



By J. B. Lehman, President Southern Institute, Edwards, Miss. 

That disunion is not a healthy condition of our spiritual 
kingdom is well understood by all the most advanced 
religious communions ; and that it should be restored to 
a healthy condition in order that it might stand before 
the world as a living testimonial of the divine power to 
heal the souls of men is the desire of a majority of Chris- 
tians. With many it has become a holy passion. 

But not many have yet arrived at the stage in their 
study of this subject where they are searching for the 
cause of the trouble. If we liken our present state of 
disunion to an unhealthy condition of the body we will 
discover a similarity of our procedure to heal the body 
of its diseases and our procedure to heal the kingdom 
of its disunion. 

Our grandfathers knew nothing of the nature of dis- 
eases, they knew only that men were suffering, and they 
desired to ease the pain and discomfort. The lance was 
the cure-all for this. It removed the blood pressure and 
no doubt the patient experienced immediate relief of 
feeling. Our fathers went one step farther and sought 
to find cures for diseases. The "herb doctor' ' searched 
the vegetable kingdom through for cures, and later the 
mineral kingdom was invaded until we now have a long 
list of drugs. Added to this came nostrums in the form 
of patent medicines. The theory was that for every dis- 
ease a cure was provided by a beneficent providence and 
he who would find it would be doing a great service for 
mankind. But we of our day have discovered that most 
diseases are caused by germs which live in the body as 
parasites. We are no longer searching for new rem- 
edies and are fast losing our faith in those our fathers 



found. We are almost in the act of giving all care of 
sick people to the trained nurse and setting the physician 
to enforcing laws of sanitation which he has formulated 
from his knowledge of the means of transmission of 

Our experience in dealing with the diseased condition 
of the church is very similar to this. There has not been 
a time since the beginning of the Protestant Reformation 
when disunion was not looked upon with the greatest of 
dread. In every case the body from which the schism 
came did everything in its power to prevent the division 
and the followers of the schism exhausted every effort 
possible before taking the final step that broke the bond 
of union. During this time the spiritual lance was the 
only remedy they knew that would give relief from the 
agony incident to their experiences. When the feelings 
of mutual accusation became too great, excommunica- 
tion was resorted to and it always served to let off the 

But that day is well past now for practically all com- 
munions. There may yet come into being many new 
communions, but they will not come by excommunication, 
but rather by a sloughing off process. We have now well 
entered into the period when we are searching for a rem- 
edy to cure the disease. We may not be searching as 
diligently as the old "herb doctor" did, but we are 
nevertheless searching for remedies. These are of va- 
rious kinds of federations and cooperations and affilia- 
tions from which we are surely getting cures, and we do 
not desire to be understood as casting any aspersions 
on them. They are a relief and they will certainly lead 
to the next step of searching for the germ of the dis- 
ease, without which there can be no relief from further 
infection. Our present Federal Council and Christian 
union federations may even succeed to the point of unit- 
ing all our most prominent communions ; yet if the cause 


of infection is not known and proper sanitary precau- 
tions taken, there will certainly come new alignments 
in which we will divide among ourselves and especially 
great is the danger that we will separate from the newer 
people coming into the church. The justification of this 
statement is seen in the fact that in every known Prot- 
estant communion are conservatives and progressives 
between whom is carried on a more or less acrimonious 
discussion. In some of them are many intermediary 
groups which would be hard to classify. No remedy, no 
matter how efficacious, can save us from further humil- 
iation until the cause is removed. No remedy could stop 
yellow fever epidemics. We had to await the day when 
we discovered that a certain variety of mosquito was the 
intermediary, and when that day came further epidem- 
ics became impossible. 

A Search for the Germ 

Our search for the germ must be in the history of 
the civilizations that we must deal with. We have had 
just three civilizations to deal with since Christ was 
upon the earth; viz., Jewish, Roman and Anglo-Saxon. 
These have shown acquired habits which by the circum- 
stances of their environment were so well developed 
that we must call them instincts for want of another 
term. Paul referred to them on many different occa- 
sions and by the use of various terms. When writing to 
the Romans he called them "the flesh," when writing 
to the Galatians he used the phrase "the works of the 
flesh,' ' but when writing to his own race he used the 
expression ' ' the sin which doth so easily beset us. ■ ' Now 
when we remember that the Christian religion has within 
it the power to destroy all of the sins peculiar to any 
civilization, if properly applied to the children by teach- 
ers thoroughly devoted to the work, and if we remember 
that when this teaching of the children is neglected or 


improperly done, we can see at a glance how handicapped 
the various civilizations have been in their task of leader- 
ship. A study of each will make this clear. 

I. The Jewish Civilization. For fourteen centuries 
the descendants of Abraham lived under a religion that 
was largely composed of rites and ceremonials, during 
which time habits were matured into well formed in- 
stincts so that they were "a peculiar people.' ' Jesus 
came to save them from this by showing them how these 
types and ceremonials were prophetic in nature. The 
devout Israelite was expected to see in them a type of 
things that were to come. Those Jews who saw the 
spiritual significance in them easily fell in line with their 
great teacher, but the great mass of the nation lost this 
high purpose and acted only from the promptings of the 
instinct, a kind of reflex action. This led at first to the 
rejection of Christ, and later, when the church had 
gained a degree of great popularity and they joined it, 
to a Judseizing propaganda. So violent did they be- 
come that we may with safety infer that had they had 
the imperial power they would have attempted, with the 
sword, to Judseize the church. Paul was able to cir- 
cumvent their designs to the extent that they did not 
accomplish their purpose, but they were strong enough 
to prevent him from organizing a sufficient force to teach 
the first generation of Romans before they should be 
entrusted with the management of the work of the king- 
dom. This was one of the great tragedies in human his- 
tory. Had the Jewish nation allowed Jesus and his apos- 
tles to organize them into a compact body as "a hen 
gathers her chickens under her wings" for the purpose 
of doing their full duty to the Roman child, the story 
of the early Roman Church would have been a different 

II. The Roman Civilization. For twelve centuries 
the Romans lived under imperial Rome and during that 


time they had experiences that burned themselves upon 
their souls in powerful instincts. These were sure to be- 
come sins which would easily beset them unless they were 
released from their power by Christian teachers. Paul 
knew their true character and gave a most vivid word 
picture of it in the first chapter of Romans. It is only 
the child of a people that can be liberated from the power 
of acquired instincts and, if that is not done, they will 
inflict these upon the church at their first opportunity. 
Paul knew the Romans would do this and so warned the 
church at Ephesus. And what Paul feared the Romans 
immediately proceeded to do and the Roman Catholicism 
of the Middle Ages was the result. No other nation 
without the experiences that the Romans had from the 
elder Brutus to Augustus could have made that, and the 
unliberated Romans could not have done otherwise. The 
responsibility of the wrongs of the Middle Ages lies far 
more at the door of the Judseizing Jews who prevented 
the execution of Christ's programme than at the door 
of the Romans. 

III. The Anglo-Saxon Civilization, The ancient 
Goths lived for a long period in a turbulent tribal life 
in which existed no imperial power such as was found 
in Rome. A certain contention over shades of meanings 
became a well fixed instinct in them, just as the palaver 
house instinct still clings to the American negro. By 
and by these Goths were captured by the Romans and 
with the sword their imperial power was extended over 
them. A little later, practically with the same process, 
the hierarchical form of the church was also forced upon 
them. But it was not in the power of the Goth to gain 
the same concept of government or of religious hier- 
archy as the Roman had. The sin which so easily be- 
set the Roman could by no manner of means give the 
idea to the Goth as the Roman saw it. Consequently, 
as soon as he gained sufficient power, he threw off the 


yoke of imperial Eome and constructed in its stead feu- 
dalism ; and a little later on lie threw off the yoke of the 
Catholic hierarchy and made in its stead Protestantism. 
But, since the child of the Goth had never been released 
by teachers from the Roman Church from the sin which 
so easily beset him, he was sure to inflict this upon what- 
ever he could as soon as he was wholly free to do as 
he pleased. Consequently he soon made feudalism over 
into partizan politics and Protestantism over into de- 
nominationalism. Even our perfectly constructed United 
States constitution with its excellent non-partizan pro- 
visions could not keep him from ward politics and the 
high ideals of the leaders of Protestantism could not 
keep him from groveling in denominational bickerings. 
No other nation without the experiences of the descend- 
ants of the Goth could make a denomination over the 
shade of meaning of a preposition or a verb. No other 
nation can ever gain our viewpoint of these things. The 
sin which doth so easily beset us shows itself on every 
turn as in, 

"What should we do in that small colony 
Of pinched fanatics who would rather choose 
Freedom to clip an inch or more from their hair, 
Than the great chance of setting England free? 
Not there, amid the stormy wilderness, 
Should we learn wisdom; or if learned, what room 
To put into act, — else worse than naught? 
We learn our souls, more, tossing for an hour 
Upon this huge and ever vexed sea 
Of human thought, where kingdoms go to wreck 
Like fragile bubbles in yonder stream, 
Than in cycles of New England sloth, 
Broke only by some petty Indian war, 
Or quarrel for a letter more or less 
In some hard word, which, spelt in either way, 
Not their most learned clerks can understand. ' ' 

Had the Eoman Christian come to our children to 
give us one well trained generation ere we were en- 
trusted to the leadership in the church, we would have 
been spared all the humiliation that now we must feel 


when we survey what we have done. Surely, if Paul 
was forced to admit that Rome, still a wild branch, was 
grafted into the tame tree, he would say that the Goth 
came in as another wild branch. 

Before denomination making ceases to be a pleasant 
pastime of the people of our Anglo-Saxon age we must 
be exorcised of the demons that have come all the way 
from the forests of Germany with us. But, since we 
were denied such teachers as we should have had before 
we were entrusted with authority, how are we going to 
sanctify ourselves for the future task? 

The Remedy 

As the Jew owed a service to the Roman and the 
Roman to the Goth, so we now owe a responsibility to 
all the remaining civilizations. On every sea wall are 
peering in upon us millions of newer peoples. We have 
already discovered that the Chinaman can never gain 
our concept of denominationalism and our missionaries 
have sent up the white flag of surrender without con- 
sulting the folks at home. The carefully made out pro- 
gramme to give all these peoples our denominationalism 
was broken over the side of the mountain and a new one 
was made with denominationalism left out. Now if we 
discover ere it is too late how great a task it will be to 
give China, Japan, India, Africa and a half score of 
other nations a well trained generation of men and 
women before they will be entrusted to leadership, — if 
we undertake in earnest to prevent them from inflict- 
ing upon the church all their sins which so easily beset 
them, we will easily destroy our own. While the China- 
man can not get our idea of denominationalism, his three 
thousand years of ancestor worship can do monstrous 
things if we fail as the Judseizing Jews did. Our de- 
bates over evolution and criticism — perfect specimen of 
our sin which so easily besets us — in this the world's 


greatest crisis, is a crime greater than the Judseizing 
Jews committed when they said "Thou wentest in to 
men uncircumcised. ' ' Our own salvation and the sal- 
vation of the newer peoples demand that we undertake 
this world's greatest task as a united body, not waiting 
to adjust finer shades of meaning of words and doctrines. 
An army of our choicest young men and women must 
go forth to do what must be done in this generation and 
we must prepare to support them with as great prepara- 
tion as we now make to send our armies across sea to 
bring order in the world that the work may be done. 
After we shall have done our duty in this crisis our sin 
which doth so easily beset us will have been "crucified." 

J. B. Lehman. 



By Henry C. Armstrong, Secretary of the Association for the Promotion 
of Christian Unity, Baltimore;, Md. 

"There is one body and one Spirit. " — Eph. 4:4. 

The supreme concern which at this moment challenges 
all the forces of society and puts a holy urgency upon 
every righteous movement in Christendom is the recon- 
struction of a broken world. Whole nations are in con- 
fusion. How shall they be led into light? The world 
is in pieces. How shall it be rebuilt? What of the fu- 
ture? What does the morrow hold in its hand for weal 
or woe? 

"Watchman, tell us of the night, 
What its signs of promise are? 
Traveller, o'er yon mountain's heights, 
See that glory-beaming star! 

"Watchman, doth its beauteous ray, 
Aught of joy or hope foretell? 
Traveller, yes: it brings the day, 
Promised day of Israel.' ' 

Is this the day? Are the signs fair, east and west? A 
certain man of "big business" said a few days ago, "If 
any man in my business can tell what the next year 
will bring forth he is worth a salary of a million 
dollars." That is just what no man can tell. Business 
is just now facing the gravest crisis in its history. So 
it is with nations. All the nations, conquered and con- 
querors alike, have on hand the most serious problems 
nations have ever been called upon to solve. The ques- 
tion which haunts the world's business is what about 
labor ? What are the workers going to do ? The question 



which haunts the nations is what about the thoughts, 
feelings, purposes of men and women! What are people 
going to do! These are human questions. Indeed they 
are one question, and that one question is, what about 
democracy? "What will it do, what can it do with the 
present systems, commercial, industrial, political), so- 
cial! Can it use them or must they be "scrapped?" 
They are parts and organs of an aristocratic and auto- 
cratic civilization. Can they function in the democracy 
that is to be! 

And what of religion? Christendom faces the same 
grave crisis. Can democracy use the religious systems 
of yesterday? They, too, are parts and organs of an 
aristocratic and autocratic civilization. Can they func- 
tion in the democratic life of tomorrow? What will de- 
mocracy do, what can it do with the church, the present 
divided church? This is the most serious question of 
the hour. The church is "the pillar and ground of 
truth." Through the church is to be made known "the 
manifold wisdom of God, according to the eternal pur- 
pose which He purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord." 
The church carries the fortunes of the world. The pur- 
pose of God and the highest destinies of all mankind are 
at stake in the question, what of the church and the new 
world? Democracy must have a church. What kind of a 
church must its church be ? Can democracy use the pres- 
ent type of church? The present church is wofully and 
scandalously divided. Can a divided church function in 
the democracy that is to be ? 

Democracy like science has its postulates. There are 
some things to be taken for granted, some things which 
are basic, without which -democracy cannot subsist or ex- 
ist. The first of these is the solidarity of the people. 
The very first principle of democracy is the unity of the 
people, for democracy is the reign of the people. There 
must therefore, be a people. Just as there can be no 


kingdom without a king, so neither can there be a de- 
mocracy without a demos. Therefore democracy postu- 
lates and requires the unity of the people, for democracy 
is the reign not of some of the people, which is aristoc- 
racy, but of all the people. The people must therefore 
be one, if there is to be any such thing as democracy. 
The forces which are to function in a democracy there- 
fore and the factors which are to work out its purposes 
must be unifying forces and factors. Every force which 
makes for disintegration is the foe of democracy. What- 
ever divides the people opposes democracy, and must 
be eliminated if democracy is to prevail. Every indus- 
trial principle which arrays men against men, every com- 
mercial practice which places the interest of some against 
the good of all, every social custom which draws lines 
and puts class over against mass — these are all con- 
trary to the basic postulate of democracy, and the sys- 
tems built upon these principles and practices are await- 
ing their turn of the attention of that great new social 
world-spirit which is just now finishing up with autoc- 
racy. What of the church? Obviously any religious 
system which estranges men from each other and dis- 
integrates the spiritual solidarity of the people is de- 
mocracy's greatest foe and hindrance. Here is the su- 
preme tragedy of the whole case. A divided church di- 
vides the people. It disintegrates the soul of the demos. 
Keligious division by dividing the people on those most 
sacred issues concerning which unity is most essential 
strikes at the very heart of democracy. It makes for 
disintegration in the deepest regions of the people's 
life. Division in the church, therefore, becomes a dis- 
integrating force in the morality and religion of the 

It is a well-known and painful fact that religious dif- 
ferences generate the strongest antipathies and create 
bitterest prejudices. This is the sin and curse of sec- 


tarianism. It promotes the severest kind of group con- 
sciousness as over against that consciousness-of-the- 
whole without which there can be neither democracy nor 
Kingdom of God. It fosters the ugliest kind of class 
pride and class contempt and thereby stands diametri- 
cally opposed both to democracy and the brotherhood of 
man. Division in religion breaks up the very sources of 
democracy, for true democracy is not merely the manage- 
ment of affairs by the people, nor merely the will of 
the people imposing itself upon society, but it is the 
life, heart and soul, will and character, of the people 
expressing itself in social, industrial, and political forms 
and systems of its own creation and likeness. Eeligious 
function is to create the life, to make the heart and nur- 
ture the soul of the people. It is Christianity's glorious 
function to make the people one and righteous. That 
there may be for democracy a righteous and united will 
of the people to express and enforce, there must be 
6 ' one body and one spirit. ' ' But a divided church makes 
a divided people. It therefore cannot function in the 
new order. Democracy cannot use it, nor tolerate it. 
The divided church must go, or democracy must go, 
which shall it be? Democracy postulates and requires a 
united church. How important therefore that all Chris- 
tians seek now as never before "to keep the unity of the 

Division in the church stands not only for the defeat 
of the great spiritual and practical programme of de- 
mocracy, but stands also for the defeat of the very mis- 
sion and purpose of Christianity in the world. Christian- 
ity too has its postulates. The Gospel assumes some 
basic facts. It not only assumes, it declares the unity 
of all mankind. i * God hath made of one blood all nations 
of men." This is a basic fact on which science and 
revelation agree. This is the natural unity in which 
all nations and races are one by blood and birth. Nor 


is this all. The Gospel not only postulates the natural 
unity of mankind, but it does a thing vastly greater. It 
undertakes to perfect mankind in the realization of its 
spiritual unity. As nature by one birth makes all men 
of one blood so Grace by the new birth makes all men 
of one spirit — by a new birth makes mankind one new 
man, one new spiritual man. This is the Gospel of the 
Cross. "For He is our peace, who hath made both one, 
and hath broken down the middle wall of partition ; hav- 
ing abolished in His flesh the enmity ; * * * * for to make 
in Himself of twain one new man." The task of the 
church is therefore clearly defined. Namely, to be the 
one body in which all mankind shall be and know itself 
one ; to be the one body in which Christ can make of all 
mankind the one new man in Himself. 

To the church then belongs by right the supreme 
privilege and the supreme providence of the hour, this 
crucial hour in which broken, bewildered humanity is 
trying to find itself; in which a world rent in pieces is 
seeking the way to unity and peace. She alone has the 
secret of unity. She alone has the secret of peace. But, 
alas! her divisions deny and defeat her message. She 
cannot show the world the way to unity because she is 
divided herself. She cannot be the world's teacher, be- 
cause she cannot be the world's example. Says a recent 
writer, "Here is our point of departure as church mem- 
bers. We shall never speak with any authority, upon the 
things which make for human peace among the king- 
doms of the world so long as our own house is a divided 
house. We vitiate our gospel of goodwill and nullify 
our preaching of peace on earth if there attaches to the 
actual organized work of the church universal the pres- 
ent suspicion of sectarianism and self-interest. The 
Christian Church must begin her new task by setting 
her own house in order so that she may persuade the 
world that within the limits of her own immediate in- 


terests she has succeeded in dramatizing anew this old 
and ever new Will to Fellowship — Christ's Gospel of 
Love. ' '* Truly writes another, ' ' The Church that wishes 
to preach brotherhood to the nations and embody it in 
the social order must first exemplify it in her own fellow- 
ship."! World democracy postulates and requires a 
world church. A united church alone can be the organ 
of the united hopes, aims, longings, loyalties, faith and 
love of a united humanity. Nay, there can be a united 
humanity only when a united church makes it one in 
Christ. Indeed all humanity is essentially one in all the 
deepest things of its life. Its waits for the all embrac- 
ing fellowship of a united church to become the organ 
and body of its one soul. A beautiful illustration told by 
an eye-witness comes to us from France; France, once 
so far away, now so near. 

"The old cemetery in a certain French seaport town 
presented a strange sight one cloudy afternoon in Octo- 
ber. Through the years the French had buried their 
dead there, one by one, in the solemn order of things. 
Then came the war, from which everything has its date. 
And the old cemetery was busy as it never was before, 
receiving the long line of brave Frenchmen who had 
given their lives for France. And so it was that 'Mort 
pour France' was marked on many a white cross stand- 
ing sentinel there. When I entered, these white crosses 
were topped with a little French flag, which, fluttering 
in the wind, made a fascinating sight. But beyond the 
tops of these hundreds and hundreds of French graves 
with their fluttering little flags, I saw other flags on other 
white crosses, and in that great corner of God's acre 
in old Brittany were buried hundreds of our American 
men. Among these American graves I saw many French 
women busy — busy planting flowers on American graves. 
One young woman took out a pencil. On the white paint 

*Rev. W. Iv. Sperry, in The Constructive Quarterly. 
fRev. H. S. Coffin, in "In a Day of Rebuilding." 


of the cross she wrote, 'Adoptee, Marie Tenare.' Then 
I heard the little story I wish every American could 

" These French women were adopting these American 
boys for their own during the war. Adopted for that 
delicate care and loving thought American mothers and 
sisters would gladly give if the ocean did not separate, 
all of these graves were being cared for. In season and 
out, rain or shine, the daily pilgrimage to the cemetery 
was made, in spite of all the burdens those women of 
France were already bearing. And when I asked ' Why ? ? 
they replied: ' Because they are away from home and 
their own mothers cannot come here.' "* 

Motherhood and mother-love — one the world over. 
Neither French, English, Italian, Belgian nor American, 
but human — divine. Love is one, faith is one, hope is 
one. One God and Father of all, one Lord, one calling. 
God gives us one church, one fellowship. 

*James H. Causey. 


Under "Letters to the Editor" in this issue are twelve 
letters, representing six different communions, relative 
to the union of denominational schools, especially denom- 
inational seminaries. They furnish interesting reading. 
The Methodists speak in its favor, the Congregational- 
ists present two viewpoints, the Presbyterians are cau- 
tious, while the Episcopalians, Christians and Disciples 
either dissent or favor cooperation, retaining denomina- 
tional control. Others wrote, but requested that their let- 
ters should not be published. It is an issue that every 
communion must face. In this connection, there is an 
interesting account in the Brisbane Daily Standard of 
the union of two Presbyterian and Methodist institu- 
tions in Australia. It says : 

The consummation of a desire to enter into joint possession of 
the Brisbane High School for Girls and the Clayfield Boys' College by 
the Presbyterian and Methodist Schools' Association, was the occasion 
of a monster demonstration at the Exhibition Concert Hall last night. 
The State Governor (Sir Hamilton Goold- Adams) presided, and with 
him on the platform were Sir David Hardie, M.D. (chairman of the as- 
sociation), Eev. E. H. Sugden, M.A., B.Sc, Litt. D. (Master of Queen's 
College, University of Melbourne), the whole of the dignitaries of the 
Methodist and Presbyterian churches of the metropolitan area, numerous 
members of the provincial ministry, and the united choirs of the Presby- 
terian and Methodist churches, under the direction of Mr. Victor Gal- 
way, Mus. Bac, and Mr. A. H. Littler. The back galleries, platform, 
body of hall and main gallery were packed to their utmost capacity, the 
scholars of both colleges being in attendance. The proceedings opened 
with the singing of the "Old Hundred," followed by a dedicatory 

Eev. R. Stewart read the official historic statement, which briefly 
set forth the negotiations which were initiated towards the latter end of 
last year. A joint committee of four Presbyterians and four Metho- 
dists had carried out the negotiations with the proprietor of the Clay- 
field College for boys (Mr. A. W. Rudd, M.A., LL.B.), and the Girls' 
High School proprietresses, Miss C. E. Harker, B.A., and Miss M. K. 
Jarrett, B'.A., the services of all three being retained as principals mean- 
while. An actual partnership in the colleges was entered into by the 
two churches, officers and council elected, and the present inaugural 
ceremony arranged. In conclusion he said: "We have no aggressive 
designs against the existing system of education. We seek to supple- 



ment, rather than to supplant. We ask no assistance from the state, 
nor from anyone, save from those who think with us, and are friends of 
education and of the Christian way." 

The Governor said he was present for a dual purpose. The first 
object was a "house-warming." and the second object was the placing 
of a stone in a bridge which shortly was going to join the two churches. 
(Applause.) He hoped ere long the gulf between all the Christian 
churches would be so bridged. Sir Hamilton spoke in eulogistic terms 
of the united efforts of the joint committee. He referred to the ex- 
cellent opportunities that were afforded the children relegated to the 
charge of the college principals, and offered kindly advice to the boys 
and girls regarding their conduct, adjuring them, if ever they were in 
trouble, to take their trouble direct to their tutor. Queensland with its 
delightful climate and so little necessity for confinement to a home 
frequently made young people impatient of the restraints of home. This 
was one of the problems for teachers. He heartily congratulated the 
two churches and hoped the present ceremony was the forerunner of a 
much greater union. (Applause.) 

Rev. J. Gibson, M.A. (chairman of the Presbyterian Board of Edu- 
cation), delivered an address upon the advantages to be gained from 
the step now taken. He dwelt upon the comparative ease with which 
the cooperation of the two bodies had been brought about. Not alone in 
the matter of education had the two churches united. They had coop- 
erated their efforts to assist the soldiers. (Applause.) Now they were 
joining hands in extending the home mission work. They were coming 
to know each other, and when once they had overcome that ignorance of 
one another, the task of bringing about a general unity would be com- 
paratively simple. 

Rev. E. H. Sugden said he was satisfied that the present union 
marked a much greater union that was coming to the Christian Church. 
All felt thankful for the good news that was coming along the wires, 
and what occasioned the good news? Simply the unity of British, 
Americans, French, and Italians who were united for good. Such unity 
must prevail. The true Christians were fighting against a worse enemy 
than even the Germans. They were fighting against the enemy of dis- 
sension against those who ever desired to stir up strife. The French- 
man once had his bitter feelings against Britain when he remembered 
Waterloo; the American too, had memories of bitter trials, but now they 
were prepared to wipe out all past differences, and the result was united 
action and success against the common enemy of mankind. He wanted 
the Methodist people and the Presbyterian people to become united even 
before their committees entered into " arrangements. ' ' He read a mes- 
sage of congratulations from Rev. Dr. Carruthers, who said the move- 
ment would be watched by people right throughout Australia. (Ap- 
plause. ) 

Sir David Hardie moved, — ' ' That this meeting of persons interested 
in the work of education and in the maintenance therein of evangelical 
Christian influences hereby expresses its hearty approval of the action of 
the Presbyterian and Methodist churches in establishing schools for 
primary and secondary education under their combined auspices, and 
promises its continued and loyal support to the enterprise now begun, and 
to such other enterprises in the same direction as may be determined 
on." He asked all present to give their heartiest support to the scheme. 
He thought all would agree that the scheme was a good one, and would 
tend to elevate. 


Mr. J. J. King (hon. secretary of the Schools' Association) sec- 
onded the resolution. He believed it was in the interests of education, 
for cooperation brought greater efficiency. Then there was the char- 
acter of the two colleges they were taking over. Both were held in high 
repute among the educational institutions of Brisbane. They would con- 
tinue the policy of the schools and retain the principals — (great ap- 
plause) — and naturally would look for greater efficiency. He thought 
the cooperation was the pathway to the union of the churches. Their 
combination in educational interests would take effect right throughout 

The resolution was carried with great enthusiasm. 

The Metropolitan, British Columbia, F. H. Du Ver- 
net, makes a plea for the laying aside of prejudices and 
approaches the subject of Christian union by the com- 
prehension of the best in all communions. The following 
excerpt is taken from a Canadian paper : 

Church union is something which cannot be forced but it can be 
helped. Undoubtedly what will help most to bring about church union 
is more of the Spirit of Christ in the hearts of all church members, but 
in addition to this there must be the creation of a right public opinion 
upon the subject. The present situation is that among church leaders 
there is a strong tendency towards church union, but what is holding 
back the movement is the denominational pride and the unreasonable 
prejudice of many among the rank and file of church members. It re- 
quires careful teaching to remove this hindering prejudice, and wider 
vision to overcome this isolating pride. 

It may help on the great cause to briefly state the position now 
occupied by a large number of church leaders. 

It is now more widely recognized than formerly that mere unity 
of spirit is not enough. This unity of spirit which is invisible must 
manifest itself in some visible organic form. There may be many dif- 
ferent parts, each part with a different function, but the body, how- 
ever complex, must be one. Cooperation alone is not enough, there must 
be coordination of different parts under one comprehensive plan. 

It is now almost universally conceded that by church union is not meant 
any such thing as the absorption of one church by another church. The 
result of bringing the various denominations into organic union will 
not be the aggrandisement of any one of the existing churches, but the 
creation of a great comprehensive church such as will gladden the heart 
of Christ. 

It is now clearly understood that the leading characteristics of the 
various denominations are not to be obliterated, but they are to form 
the valuable contribution which each church is to make to the great 
comprehensive body. All the leading Protestant churches hold the same 
great essentials of faith, but they differ in minor particulars. In the 
olden days these minor particulars were considered important enough 
to vigorously maintain even to the point of separating from the exist- 
ing body and forming a new organization, but in the course of centuries 
the value of these peculiar views have in most cases been recognized by 
the others so that the need for the separate sect has ceased to exist. 


Barriers are now crumbling which once were considered insurmountable. 

As an illustration of what is meant we have on the one hand the 
Presbyterian Church and the Methodist Church taking more kindly to 
the occasional use of liturgical forms, and on the other hand we have 
the House of Bishops of the Anglican Church in Canada sanctioning 
under cetrain limitations the use in church of extempore prayer. 

The Anglican Church has long made provision for both adult and 
infant baptism, and also for baptism by immersion as well as by effusion. 

The most recent development among church leaders in England has 
been the discovery that even in the matter of church order which has 
been the great difficulty in the way of church union between the Angli- 
can Church and other Protestant churches there is the possibility 
of bridging the gulf by the candid recognition of two great facts with- 
out going into any explanation of these facts. The first is the fact of 
the episcopate in the greater part of Christendom as the recognized organ 
of the continuity of the church " which members of the episcopal 
churches ought not to be expected to abandon." The second is the fact 
that " there are a number of Christian churches not accepting the epis- 
copal order which have been used by the Holy Spirit in His work of en- 
lightening the world, converting sinners, and perfecting saints. " 

If we could only get the rank and file of our various churches to 
follow their leaders, laying aside their prejudice and their pride, and 
endeavoring to ' l get together ' ' it would not be long before the spirit 
of unity which is undoubtedly growing amongst us would manifest itself 
in some outward form of church union. 

As it has been well said an unbelieving world is the price we are 
paying for a divided Christianity. 

Pulpit exchange between Anglicans and non-Angli- 
cans is receiving some lively discussion in the British 
press as well as radical action in some instances. The 
Christian Commonwealth, London, says: 


The pioneer work done by the City Temple is bearing fruit. It is 
now possible for an Anglican clergyman to preach in a Nonconformist 
church without being " inhibited ' ' by the bishop of the diocese. The 
visits of Bishop Henson and Rev. W. A. Cunningham Craig to the City 
Temple have been followed by one from the Rector of St. Botolph's, 
Bishopsgate. The announcement that Rev. G. W. Hudson Shaw would 
take Miss Royden's place last Sunday evening was described by The 
Church Family Newspaper as a " piquant' ' development, but there was no 
public episcopal intervention. It only remains for Anglicans to invite 
Nonconformists to preach in their churches to make the li interchange ' ' 
complete. As will be seen by what follows, the Bishopsgate rector is 
courageously taking steps in this direction. 

Rev. Hudson Shaw, who was in khaki, conducted the whole of the 
service in the City Temple on Sunday evening. In the extempore prayer 
he gave thanks for the harmony between ourselves and our Allies, and 
for "the powerful and timely aid in our time of need by the United 
States of America. " The prayer concluded: — "We beseech Thee to give 
us grace to lay to heart the great dangers we are in by our unhappy 
divisions in the church. Take away all hatred and prejudice, and what- 
soever else may hinder us from godly union and concord, that as there is 


one body and one spirit and one hope of our calling, one Lord, one faith, 
one God and Father of us all, so we henceforth may be all of one 
heart, one soul, united in one holy bond of truth and peace, of faith and 
love, and so may with one mind and one mouth glorify Thee. ' ' 

Before the sermon Rev. Hudson Shaw said: I was unable to accept 
an invitation to preach here some months ago, and so I asked that I might 
be invited once more to speak in the City Temple. And why? Because 
I am getting old; I am in my sixtieth year, and it is time I did some- 
thing. I am tired of talking, tired of saying the smooth things to my 
brethren who worship with other forms and in other churches; the time 
has come when we must act, and so I hope Dr. John Clifford will preach 
in my church next Thursday at midday, and so I preach in your church 
to-night. It means for my part just a longing for fellowship with all 
Christians, I do not care who they may be. Shall we wait until the men 
come back from France and mid us just as they left us, still making plans, 
still talking, and neglecting to do the obvious human, admirable thing, 
namely, to get together? A Yorkshireman whom I met in London the 
other day took up this very point, that we must not delay any longer in 
our reforms, and told, as an illustration, of a coroner who was holding 
an inquest on a Yorkshire farmer who had hanged himself in his barn. 
The coroner had two witnesses. He asked the first, "What did you 
do when you made this discovery?" "Well," said the man, "I didn't 
know what to do, so I went to find a friend to ask his advice." The 
second witness, that same friend, came before the coroner, who said, 
"When you found this poor fellow hanging in his barn, why didn't you 
cut him down ? " " Oh ! " said the man, ' ' he wasn 't quite dead ! ' ' Have 
we got to wait until the Church is quite dead? We want action, straight- 
away, now. 

A British chaplain, writing in The Challenge, Lon- 
don, says: 

At a large base hospital in France, on the special day of Thanks- 
giving and intercession in August last, we held a united communion 
service. As the Anglican chaplain I officiated; the Methodist chaplain 
read the Epistle and administered the chalice, and the Roman Catholic 
chaplain preached the sermon, though one must add that the latter only 
came in to preach, leaving immediately after the sermon. 

The number of actual communicants was the largest ever known, 
and there certainly was not seating room for the congregation. Men 
and women of all shades of opinion, from the Highest Anglican (unfortu- 
nate expression) to Plymouth Brother, took part in the service. The 
result was almost electrical. A wonderful feeling of unity spread through 
the place and there is no question but that services held on subsequent 
Sundays were greatly influenced by the united Holy Communion service. 

Of course, the Methodist chaplain and myself differed on many 
points, but we discussed the matter frankly and came to the same con- 
clusion as your correspondent — namely, that we found in each others' 
rites, memorial, communion and fellowship. I believe that had we desired 
on this occasion to maintain ourselves within our own sectarian walls 
the spiritual work of Christ's Church on earth would have been hindered. 

Another writer in the same paper regards the pulpit 
interchange as a method that is "dull and hackneyed, ' ' 
especially when "the time is ripe for adventure and ex- 


periment, for reaching out into new territories and dis- 
covering new possibilities of spiritual cooperation." 
Continuing, he says: 

The unity of the Church that is to convert the world must be deeper 
and wider than anything that we have yet seen in church organization. 
There must be one living organism, and not a federation of loose units; 
and in this organism — because "living" and "one" — an endless variety 
of function and form. Through this living organism the Spirit of God 
will operate upon the world with overwhelming power. We shall be swept 
along by new enthusiasms inspired by new visions, we shall see 
the splendour of sacrifice and the victory of love, we shall see miracles 
of conversion and miracles of healing. All this is possible because it 
is the will of God. 

It is the desire for this kind of unity, and an unconquerable belief 
in the power of God to achieve it, we must strive to create. We may 
safely leave to experts the elaboration of a satisfactory scheme. Such 
men, for example, as compose the committee on "Faith and Order, " 
men who have devoted years to the study of the problem, who have a 
firm grasp of fundamentals, who are sensitive to the temper of their 
' ' constituents, ' ' men of vision and initiative and of ripe wisdom, may 
be trusted to show us a way to unity that will violate the conscience of 
no' man who is penitent. But no scheme, no machinery, not even the 
universal acceptance of episcopacy, will produce that unity which is to 
convert the world unless * ' the spirit of the living creatures be within the 
wheels ! ' ' 

Intercommunion is almost as delicate as pulpit ex- 
changes. Chaplain W. E. S. Holland, an Anglican, writ- 
ing in The Challenge, London, says: 

Whatever may be true about the remote past, the last thirty years 
have witnessed a great advance in the matter of inter-communion and 
exchange of pulpits among non-Anglican bodies. The same period has 
witnessed the formation of the United Church of South India, compre- 
hending the Congregational, Presbyterian, American, and Dutch Reformed 
churches of the area. It has seen a large union of Presbyterian churches 
in Scotland and of Methodist churches in England; while the Free 
Church Council in England has established a quasiparochial system in 
some large towns, whereby the rights of each chapel in its assigned dis 
trict are recognised by all the other bodies. Moreover, relationships have 
become so intimate, cordial and fraternal as to abate very considerably 
the mischiefs of division. These are no mean achievements, and these 
are indications that more is to follow. Have we sufficient warrant for 
denying connection between the two processes? 

In this connection I have wondered whether the logic of i Cor. x. 17 
suggests that the eating of the loaf tends to make for the unity of those 
partaking. Whenever I have consulted non-Anglicans on the matter I 
have found their opinion clear and emphatic that nothing would so 
expedite their reunion with ourselves as the practice of inter-communion. 
Ought the question we address to those presenting themselves at the 
sacrament of personal union with Christ to be: "Are you Anglican, or 


Greek, or Presbyterian, or Methodist?" Ought it not to be: "Are you 
Christian V 

For an example of the unspeakable injury our practice in this matter 
works on the mission field may I quote a passage from my Goal of India? 

"In a certain part of India a remarkable movement towards Christ 
has recently arisen in a self-contained sect of mystics, numbering several 
hundreds. It seems not to be traceable to the influence of any mission 
but to be an independent work of preparation by the Holy Spirit. The 
greater part are resident in an area worked by the Baptists. About a 
quarter are in the adjoining Anglican district. Its ramifications may 
extend to Wesleyan or Congregationalist territory. Are these people, 
now one in Muhammad, to be baptised by these different churches, and 
so to find themselves divided by Christ and out of communion with one 
another? Or should the Baptist mission follow them up and establish 
Baptist churches alongside Anglican wherever disciples of this sect of 
mystics may be found? What right have we to force our Western divisions 
upon a single movement of the Holy Spirit? May we not grieve the 
Spirit and stay His working? Time will not wait for us to settle our 
problem of inter-communion. WTiile European Christendom delays to 
heal its quarrels we are doing an injury grievous beyond all telling to 
the infant Churches of the Orient. It is not a matter of the ancient 
schisms. We are rending new-born churches. Is Christ divided? Yes." 

A Noncomformist writing in the same paper, says: 

May I say that many Nonconformists hold most emphatically "a 
doctrine of the priesthood and the full sacramental values of the Holy 
Communion. ' ' 

1. The point made that sacramentalism and priesthood are insepa- 
rable affords no difficulty to Wesleyans or to many other Nonconformists 
(as Dr. Forsyth's Church and Sacraments shows). We believe in the 
priesthood of all believers, not merely in the priesthood of certain ordered 
believers whom we call ' l ministers. * ' I take it that ultimately Nonconform- 
ists and Catholics are at one in this belief that priesthood is inherent in the 
whole church, but differ as to the method by which ministers are set apart 
to perform priestly functions. Catholics teach that this may be done 
through the apostolic succession. Noneomformists do not believe that the 
divine activity was cabined and confined to a particular method 1,800 years 
ago, but that it works to-day through the living church in diverse ways, as 
the Holy Spirit, Who, like the wind, bloweth where He listeth, suggests and 
dictates. The difference in belief is as to the methods of the Spirit's oper- 
ation, not as to the fact of priesthood. 

2. Your contributor appeals to the experience of Christ in the sacra- 
ment. This is precisely the evidence of the validity of Wesleyan sacra- 
ments that I have often advanced. We have met our Lord there. May 
not this fact be recognised as one which must be comprehended in any 
theory of the sacraments which argues against the validity of such as 
are not celebrated by an episcopally ordained minister, and yet appeals 
to experience as the supreme test of their validity? 

3. Can your contributor explain the fact that the first people 
during the last 150 years to practise and teach the necessity of frequent 
communion in the English Church were the Methodists? 

The Bishop of Albany, N. Y., in his address at the 
fiftieth annual convention of his diocese, says: 

If we assume, as I do in all that I am saying, that Jesus Christ is 
accepted as the divine Saviour of men, I believe that we can leave the 


interpretation of baptism and Holy Communion to each believer as a 
matter of personal experience between him and his Lord. There are 
particular questions concerning baptism and the Lord's Supper which 
have to be studied in detail, but I do not believe that they would raise 
obstacles to unity if there were a general agreement to abstain from impos- 
ing definitions upon those who regard sacraments as the outward and visible 
signs of a personal relation to the living Christ. We may not deny to 
any one any truth that he may find in them, lest perchance we should be 
found to interpose a barrier between Christ and the soul to which He 
is speaking. 

The Methodists in England are negotiating with the 
view to creating one British Methodist church. Of these 
negotiations The British Weekly, London, says : 

Writing the annual pastoral letter from the primitive Methodist 
Conference to the local churches, Rev. J. Tolefree Parr, who shared the 
earlier approaches on the question, pens the following paragraph on the 
spirit of the new movement : t ' The most significant, as it is the most 
hopeful, factor in the new situation is the atmosphere in which the 
deliberations have taken place: the fine spirit of brotherhood and cordial 
goodwill. There is no thought of absorption on the one hand or of 
bargaining on the other. All are inspired with the lofty purpose of 
creating, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, one Methodist church 
in Great Britain which shall include all types of Methodism faithful to 
Methodist doctrine, genius and tradition, and pooling all their resources 
in order to solve more effectively the grave and urgent problem of the 
evangelisation of our country. It is obvious to everyone that this great 
problem will never be solved by independent sectarian action, but that 
it can be attempted with infinitely more hope of success by a united 
church. " The ex-president asks the prayers of the members in behalf 
of the joint committee and its deliberations during the coming year, 
and urges local churches to approach each other with a view to united 
work, especially where war has seriously depleted the staffs of teachers 
and local preachers. The committee will present its findings on the 
possibility of Methodist union to each conference next year before any 
further step is taken. Some of the most responsible leaders in the move- 
ment suggest that union may be consummated within five years. 

The union of the three largest Lutheran communions 
in America has been received with marked satisfaction 
by all persons interested in Christian unity. These 
smaller unions must come before we can expect larger 
unions. The Churchman, New York, gives the follow- 
ing account of the Lutheran union: 

In the Lutheran merger, which took place recently in the city of 
New York, when three great synods of the Lutheran Church in this 
country gave up a separate existence to form the United Lutheran 
Church in America, advocates of church unity will find material for 


hope. Just as soon as the fissiparous tendency, which has marked the 
history of Protestantism since the Reformation, is checked and a process 
of unification sets in, Christendom will have started on its long and arduous 
upward path towards unity. Better than all the amiable protestations 
of fellowship and good feeling is some definite act of unity. We witnessed 
such an act when Lutheranism in this country became one church dur- 
ing the great meeting recently held in New York. Five hundred and 
eleven delegates met from various parts of the United States and Canada. 
The presidents of the separate synods stepped down from positions of 
authority; the synods themselves surrendered their identity. By a vote 
of the delegates, the United Lutheran Church in America came into 
being, with a membership of 1,000,000, comprising 5,000 congregations 
and 3,500 ministers. This great church is now bound together by one 
faith and one common book of worship. Dr. Carroll, the religious 
statistician, describes this movement as ' ' the swiftest and most remark- 
able union in the history of the Church." 

While the other communions are discussing rather aimlessly the 
problem of unity, the Lutherans in America have offered to the cause a 
fine deed. What is of especial interest is that the merger was effected 
without compromising the essential principles of Lutheranism. Dr. Rem- 
ensnyder in his address described the basis of Lutheran unity as being 
an agreement in faith, an acknowledgment of the authority and infalli- 
bility of the Word of God, a belief in the divinity of Clirist, in sacraments 
not as mere signs but as means of grace, a reverence for creeds and con- 
fessions and for the historic church. 

The unity of the Lutheran synods, therefore, does not mean a 
chaos of belief with unity of administration. It means a dismembered 
Lutheran Church becoming one again. If the Baptist, Methodist and 
Presbyterian churches could take such a step, church unity would be well 
on its way to realization. 

The Metropolitan Archbishop of Athens, speaking in 
the Cathedral of St. John the Divine, New York, on 
the occasion of the annual meeting of the Anglican and 
Eastern Chnrches Union, according to The Living 
Church, Milwaukee, says: 

Many in Western Europe and this great country, not knowing or 
forgetting the dreadful conditions of yoke and tyranny under which the 
East lives, think perhaps that the Greek Church does not show proper 
interest for the big problems of Christianity, the spreading of the Gospel 
to unchristian peoples, and if not dogmatic at least moral unity with the 
other Christian churches. 

They didn't pay much attention to the fact that the feet and hands 
of the most part of the Eastern Greek Church were in the collar of 
slavery, beginning from the Mother Church of Constantinople; that the 
daily care of the Greek pastors was the safety of their flocks from the 
slaughter or (t Turkishization ; ' ' that for the big ecclesiastical problems 
great episcopal councils are needed; and that the status of slavery not 
only did not allow episcopal synods, but that this status of a Turkish 
yoke was ready to consider as a cause of new sufferings the communica- 
tion with free churches. * * * Refreshed by the dew of civil free- 
dom the land of the Gospel will undoubtedly render again the plentiful 


fruitfulness of peaceful Christian life. When the cries and woes of the 
condemned disappear, then will be heard everywhere again the echo of 
the voice of Paul and Barnabas, Titus and Timotheos, Vasilios and 
Chrysostomos, teaching and preaching of affection, peace, and unity in 

The Free Church Fellowship movement, working 
without advertising, has been doing some constructive 
work in Christian unity. In the London Letter in The 
Congregationalist, Boston, it says : 

The hope for any real progress towards unity seems to lie, not in 
any scheme for incorporation or in any official denominational action, but 
in the fraternal spirit which is growing up among the younger Free 
Church ministers through the Fellowship movement. 

This movement had its rise at Swanwick and came out of the Student 
Movement. Its aim is not corporate reunion, but an immediate recogni- 
tion of unity of spirit. A similar movement has begun in the Church 
of England and the two Fellowships — Anglican and Free Church — have 
close points of contact. They have met together, discussed differences in 
the utmost charity and with the most perfect good will and attended 
(without communicating) each other's communion services. 

When members of these Fellowships meet in ordinary life, the fact 
that they are "fellows" acts like a Free Masonry and bridges differences 
on theological and ecclesiastical matters in a quite wonderful way. These 
movements are private. They do not advertise — though they publish 
literature of their own. They are content to work like leaven, slowly 
permeating the lump with the spirit of unity. 

I do not for a moment believe that the Fellowships will do anything 
to bring about uniformity — I hope they will not — but they are throw- 
ing planks across what were yawning chasms. Here again the ministry 
question is the crux of the problem. Anglicans somehow cannot see past 
the episcopal form of church government and episcopal ordination of the 
ministry. They may not claim for either any special conclusive virtue as a 
channel of grace; but they seem to think that no other form or order 
can survive the pragmatic test. The very broadest minded of them seem 
to imagine that some day the Free Churches will abandon Independency 
and Presbyterianism and Connexionalism to grasp the alleged advantages 
of episcopacy and episcopal ordination. To me that day seems very far 
away — somewhere in the Greek Kalends, I fancy. 

"The Message of the Joint Ketreat," referring to 
the third joint retreat of the Anglican and Free Church 
Fellowships, contains the following endorsement in its 
plea for local cooperation: 

In the course of these two days we have constantly confessed that 
none of our ministries or ordinances or assemblies have a complete and 


full measure of the Spirit of Christ; though all indeed have Christ truly 
with them and in them. All are true parts of the church, but no part 
of the church is perfect. Hence we are well content that every exist- 
ing sacrament should continue to be administered and every existing 
ministry should continue to be exercised whilst we strive together more 
and more to enter into the value of them all, and learn how to retain 
what is right in them and to discard what is wrong. The more we 
share each other's religious experiences and examine their ground and 
their operation in fellowship, the closer shall we get to the understanding 
which is necessary to true unity. 

This points at once to the great importance of Christians entering 
into closer fellowship with each other locally; and the wrongfulness of 
any denominational attempt to forbid or discourage such fellowship. 
No denomination is rich and full enough in its common life to claim to 
represent to its members the whole wealth of the church's experience. 
None, in isolation from the rest, can give them a complete outlook upon 
the church's duty, nor a complete sense of the church's fellowship. 
Hence we claim the right and duty of Christian people without any slur 
upon the corporate Christian life of their own denominations, to think 
together, serve together, and pray together with their fellow-members in 
Christ, entering from time to time into each other's public worship and 
seeking opportunities of the most complete inter-communion that can be 
secured without essential disloyalty to the different rules of different 
branches of the church. If necessary the growth of denominational 
activity must be pruned back to allow of this new growth in the body of 

This increase of local Christian fellowship is not only valuable and right, 
but it appears now to be the next great step toward Christian unity. 
We shall not get a real harmony of the diverse elements and principles 
emphasized in our different denominations simply by readjustments be- 
tween their official representatives, necessary though that may be. "To 
make a thing living you must make it local" is true of Christian unity 
as of everything else. Unless there is some stronger expression of 
Christian unity in local fellowship and action, we shall lack the driving 
power for reunion at the centre. 

Under the title "A League of Churches" the Bishop 
of Carlisle says many pertinent things in a recent num- 
ber of the Nineteenth Century. He puts his finger on 
the right spot when he says: 

Our divisions so far as they are unhappy spring from the same sort 
of causes as St. James tells us all our fightings proceed from: viz., the 
pleasures that war in our members; such as envy and jealousy, lust of 
pre-eminence and a covetous determination to maintain a monopoly of 
God, a delight in exclusiveness, born of an egotistic sense of superiority, 
a proud self-will and lack of generous vision, the satisfaction of our 
lower human nature in thinking we ourselves are always right and others, 
who differ from us, always wrong. These unhappy divisions are wholly 
different from legitimates varieties of opinion upon questions of doctrine 
and discipline, such as are natural and inevitable to freedom of thought. 
These varieties are quite consistent with the law of love. 


The problem of national clmrches is discussed by 
William T. Ellis in The Christian Century, Chicago. He 

Shall all. the various American denominations now conducting missions 
in China continue to propagate their own forms and faith among the 
Chinese, so that the converts to Christianity in China may soon have 
almost as many creeds as the United States; or shall the Chinese Chris- 
tians amalgamate into one national Chinese church, irrespective of their 
original relationship to various denominational missions? 

Superimpose that same problem upon all the lands of Asia and Africa, 
and upon Europe as well, especially Russia, and its magnitude and 
seriousness become apparent. 

Really, the issue becomes the now familiar one of bolsheviki l ' inter- 
nationalism, ' ' wherein class or organization takes precedence of national 
lines and loyalties, versus the American doctrine of national rights and 
national identities. Is it more important to have, say, a worldwide 
Methodist Church and a worldwide Dunkard Church, and worldwide 
Mennonite Church (for the smallest denominations must have the same 
rights of propaganda as the largest), than to have a Chinese Christian 
Church, a Persian Christian Church, a Japanese Christian Church, an 
Indian Christian Church, etc.? Which way set the tides of times? 

Both currents may be discerned. It is not difficult to discover 
streams of denominationalism that are more than babbling brooks. A 
recent issue of The Beformed Church Messenger has this editorial note: 

Even in these days when we supposed everybody was at least making 
an effort to get a broader point of view, it seems remarkable to read in 
The Church Advocate that at least one publisher is again experimenting 
along the line of * ' denominationalizing hymns. ' ' He proposes to make 
such a hymn as ' ' I love Thy Kingdom Lord ' ' much more appealing, as 
well as definite, by changing the line, "I love thy church, O Cod," to 
the line, "I Love the Lutheran Church." The Advocate thinks that 
this plan will work smoothly enough in some places, but appears to be 
worried about the proposition of inserting titles of churches with longer 
names and wonders how it would sound if anyone should try to sing into 
the verse. "I love the Old Two-Seed-in-the-Spirit Predestinarian Baptist 
Church." But what concerns us far more is that even the war does 
not seem to have brought any larger measure of common sense to some 
folks, even in the Christian Church. 

Over in China — backward, reactionary China — the Christians have 
started a ball rolling which may as it grows and goes on its way around 
the world demolish many hoary traditions and precedents and organiza- 
tions. For Chinese Christians are getting together in a Chinese church 
and the missionaries are abetting them in it. Already something like 
ten separate Presbyterian denominations from the United States, Canada 
and Great Britian have organized themselves into one ecclesiastical body 
without the word Presbyterian in its name, and both the British and 
American Congregationalists are asking to be taken in also. Property 
and pride and prestige are all deemed insufficient to prevent this great 
merger, which is avowedly only the forerunner of still greater consolida- 
tions. Indian and Japanese Christians had already effected notable 

As a matter of common sense the Chinese Christian does not care 
a copper cash for the distinctive names and forms of the American 
denominations. Why should he? His sense of humor long ago pointed 
out the absurdity of perpetuating in China Northern and Southern Presby- 


terian denominations, Northern and Southern Methodist denominations 
and Northern and Southern Baptist denominations, the only difference 
being a war in America half a century ago, between Northern and South- 
ern states! 

There are in China at the present time seventy-eight denominational 
missionary societies at work, and, as Dr. James L. Barton points out, 
1 i under their leadership seventy-eight different kinds of Protestant 
churches have been created and are being perpetuated. To many of the 
Chinese this array represents seven-eight different kinds of Christians. 
Few, indeed, of the Chinese Christians have any conception of the real 
reason why they bear a name which to them has no significance, and 
which none of them can accurately pronounce. ' ' Episcopalians have 
taken the ground that they will not proselytize in Roman Catholic lands 
where they have missions, and Congregationalists now seek only to inspire 
and vitalize the old Armenian Church, instead of making converts from 
it, and the Presbyterians follow the same policy with the Nestorian Chris- 
tians, or Assyrians. There is a vigorous sentiment abroad that this same 
policy should be followed in any religious enterprises undertaken among 
the Christians of Russia. 

That will leave for later development the larger projects of a reunion 
of all the majoT divisions of Christendom — the Roman Catholic Church, 
the Greek Catholic Church, the Protestant churches, the Gregolrians, 
Nestorians, Oopts and Abyssinians. 

The recent diocesan convention of Western New 
York received from Bishop Brent a letter, one paragraph 
of which deals with Christian unity as follows : 

There is no lesson which the churches are learning in the war zone 
of greater importance than the impotence of our divided Christianity. 
It is absurd to aim at a united mankind, or even a united Christian 
civilization, and to be content with a divided church. Many are feverishly 
anxious for something to be done to bring us together, but the moment 
for action is slipping by without action. The Archbishop of Upsala, 
all honor to him, has appealed for an ecumenical conference. Our own 
movement for a Conference on Faith and Order has not been silent or idle. 
But surely, surely there must eventually be two peace tables, one of the 
exhausted nations, the other of the exhausted churches. To have the for- 
mer without the latter would mean that the spiritual vision and the moral 
conscience of the nations was superior to that of the churches. So far 
as the churches are concerned, if all of them will not gather at call in 
the name of Christ, the only solid foundation for the present, the sole 
hope of the future:, at least those should gather who are ready and will- 
ing. There is enough catholic love, scholarship, impartiality and in- 
telligence in our ranks to safeguard and present the position of any 
absentees. The broken soul of the broken human family must give place 
to a whole soul in a whole family. Unity in a real sense according to the 
mind of Christ, and not according to my mind or yours, is so elemental 
a phase of the Gospel that without it the Gospel is a force making not f or 
order but for confusion. A confused church will be a potent factor in 
maintaining a confused world. I see no glimmer of hope for permanent 
and fraternal peace among the nations without at least as permanent 
and fraternal a peace among the churches. 


That denominationalism has a place in the present 
world order is affirmed by Dr. Shailer Mathews in The 
Universalist Leader as follows : 

Our question is, Shall we let denominations persist? My opinion is, 
we can not stop them. True, we do not to-day form many new ones. We 
have different feelings towards theology than did the Christians of the 
era when men broke with state churches to found independent groups. 
Most of our great denominations are based on different theology and were 
organized to show that other people were wrong. Ecclesiastical creeds 
were drawn in no small measure to keep some one out of the church. 
Originally the denominational organization was thus a protective device. 
It was organized on the supposition that persons who held certain doc- 
trines were wholly right and everybody else was wholly wrong. These 
groups have held over to our day, and have been supplemented by smaller 
sects. We have had a succession of these in the last twenty-five years. 
You have seen many of them rise and fall, and justly. Eeligious liberty 
permits and insures this constant differentiation. 

Should this process continue? Any answer in the nature of the case 
must be discriminating. For my own part I not only expect but want it to 
go on. I would rather have fanatics segregated by themselves than 
diffused in the ranks of the more stable organizations. Sects are safety 

The Bishop of Oxford was given a great reception 
on his American tour. Writing in The Congregational- 
ist, Boston, regarding his attitude on Christian union, 
the Kev. William E. Barton says : 

The Bishop's addresses carry conviction at every point. Some of his 
hearers, however, could not forget that his own influence in England is 
that of a vehement controversialist against all forms of union with Free 
churchmen or fail to notice that in his list of great contemporary English 
statesmen who share the ideals of America he named Asquith, Balfour 
and Lord Gray and carefully omitted Lloyd George. Just now the sort 
of men who hold with the Bishop of Oxford to the acceptance of episco- 
pacy as a divine and final method of church government, are at swords 
points with Lloyd George for everything in general; and for this in 
particular, that he has appointed Canon Henson Bishop of Herford. 
Eecent English papers report that thirteen high church Episcopal rectors 
have gone to Eome in the last few weeks as a protest against this ap- 
pointment, and the two Bishops have crossed swords through the London 
Times. Bishop Gore expressed himself as not being very optimistic about 
church reunion. Fine as is his plea for it, he himself is one of the most 
conspicuous reasons why it does not come sooner. 

A private conference of women on church unity has 
been held at South Byfield, Massachusetts. In their 
group the following communions were represented: An- 


glican, Baptist, Congregationalist, Eastern Orthodox, 
Methodist, Presbyterian, Quaker and Roman Catholic. 
From the published report the following excerpt is taken : 

It was the> Russian Church representative who summed up three ele- 
ments necessary to a united church: 1. A collective consciousness of the 
corporate life of the whole church (as found in the Eastern Orthodox 
Church). 2. The unifying influence of a Fatherly mind (as in the Roman 
Catholic Church). 3. The emphasis upon the individual soul, as found in 
the Protestant Churches. 

We were upon another plane when we began to discuss the kind of 
church needed, and here we had to touch not only on points of agreement, 
but on those which are divisive. We did not expect to arrive as yet at 
definite plans, but our work was positive, not negative in character. Each 
tried to be wholly true to her own church and to state her own position, 
yet all in an atmosphere of friendliness. 

Very early we found two conceptions face to face: 1. That of the 
direct union of the soul with Christ without visible means of grace, and 
2. That of the sacramental system; and the talk centered in the effort to 
understand each other. Along with the first came the fear of endanger- 
ing the freedom of the individual soul. With the second a strong sense 
of the corporate life of the church as the body of Christ. 

By the last afternoon and evening the members of other churches were 
pressed by the Congregationalists, Baptists and Methodists to define sac- 
ramental grace, and in a fragmentary way those representing the Catholic 
position tried to expound what that experience means to them. 

In the last session but one we tried to agree as to the conclusions 
reached, and we found that there had gradually emerged what might 
be called a Will to evident unity. We stopped there, partly because some 
of us had not yet declared ourselves as to the need for a visible organic 

But all with one mind agreed that something must be done at once 
without waiting for further agreement, and that our immediate work 
was preparatory, i. e., (1) to create a demand for church unity rather than, 
as yet, to formulate a basis for it, and (2) to create a spirit of under- 
standing and good-will between Christians of different communions. 

To meet again was inevitable, and before we adjourned a committee 
on arrangements was formed, consisting of representatives of every com- 
munion present. 

One suggested that we pledge ourselves to a daily moment of prayer 
(a lifting up of the heart) for church unity. We, by common consent, 
agreed to this, and also that each should go out to form similar groups 
for common prayer and conference for the united church. 

The get-together spirit is finely expressed by Rev. 
James E. Freeman in the Minneapolis Tribune as 
follows : 

We have been thrown in with the clergymen of all the leading religious 
bodies who are ministering in our army and navy camps, and, up to the 
present time, we have seen nothing of rivalry, but everywhere witnessed 
a fine spirit of cooperation and loyal devotion to the common cause. Of 
course, temperamental differences will always affect in some respect our 
form of worship and methods of administration, but we are perfectly clear 
in the conviction that the go-it-alone spirit is doomed, as far as the church 


is concerned, and the insular church, will be regarded in the days that 
are to follow as an insolent church. 

If this spirit prevails in the camps and on the lines, it must prevail at 
home behind the lines. We shall doubtless have to change many of our 
points of view and exercise a larger and finer spirit of liberality with 
reference to those whose temperaments and training render them in prac- 
tice different from us. Will this be to the hurt of the church or to the ex- 
tension of the kingdom of God? We believe it will be to the greater glory 
of the church and certainly to the wider extension and influence of the 
kingdom of righteousness, which is the kingdom of God. 

The get-together spirit has seized this whole nation, and we are com- 
pacted as a people and our unity is having its finest demonstration. This 
must spell out for us victory. This being so, can the people in any branch 
of our church do other than recognize that middle walls or partitions 
are a menace and a disgrace, and that they must be abolished? 

Under the imprint of the Baptist Union of Victoria, 
the following is taken from the report of the commission 
on baptism in answer to the question, What Baptists 
can do to facilitate church union? 

1. Since baptism is not essential to membership in the church universal, 
it ought not to be a bar to Christian unity. Life is infinitely more than 
terms of belief or modes of worship. So on the basis of a common life 
churches ought to constantly cooperate. 

2. But all communions virtually agree in making a baptism a pre- 
requisite to membership in any organised church. All demand a baptism 
except the Society of Friends and the Salvation Army. Roman Catholics, 
the Greek Church, and most Protestants, agree on this point. Hence the 
plea for a baptised church membership should not prevent church union. 

3. We regard baptism as being of the utmost value because of its 
emphasis on personal faith and personal responsibility, and its public 
identification of the believer with the passion and purpose of Christ, rather 
than identification with a body of men holding certain doctrines. 

4. Though in our view infant baptism is unscriptural and as baptism 
meaningless, we recognise a spiritual intention in those who practise the 
rite, and we would affectionately impress upon our brethren of the evan- 
gelical churches the advisability of substituting for their baptism of 
infants a service of dedication, which seems to us the spiritual content 
of the rite as they practise it, and of leaving the experience of baptism 
to the believer on profession of faith. 

Whilst at present we and our brethren of the other evangelical 
churches conscientiously differ on the question of baptism, we would earnest- 
ly pray that. together we may find some way to the deepest spiritual union 
and heartiest cooperation in all that pertains to the extension of Christ's 
kingdom, without the sacrifice of those principles committed to us as 
stewards of the manifold grace of God. 

Federation of the Free Churches in England moves 
slowly according to The Quarterly Register, Edinburgh, 
which says: 

The present position of the evangelical Free Churches of England 
with regard to Federation is as follows: Of the six larger denominations, 


the Baptist, Congregational and United Methodist have decided, with 
almost entire unanimity, to federate and to appoint representatives to the 
Federal Council. The Presbyterian Synod and the Primitive Methodist 
Conference referred the question to their local synods and councils. The 
Wesleyan Conference referred the matter to a special committee. Of 
the five smaller denominations, the Independent Methodists and the Wesleyan 
Reform Union agree, the Countess of Huntingdon's Connexion postpones, 
and the Moravians and Disciples of Christ have yet to report. 

The federation in France is more encouraging. The 
same paper continues: 

All Protestant Churches in France have combined in a Federation — the 
Protestant Federation of France — whose object is publicly to manifest the 
brotherly union of the French Protestants. The Federal Council of the 
French Churches, without interfering in the administrative autonomy or 
the religious activity of the constituent bodies, aims also at coordinating 
their efforts for moral and social action on the French people. 

Dr. J. H. Garrison, Claremont, California, and Dr. 
J. W. Buckham, Berkeley, California, have had an in- 
teresting discussion of Christian union in The Pacific, 
San Francisco. Dr. Garrison says: 

If it is admitted, then, that Christ's authority is an element in 
Christian catholicity, the question is whether baptism is authorized by Christ. 
Most Christians, including Oongregationalists, admit that it is. The differ- 
ence arises as to its form and its proper subject. Furthermore, there is 
very little difference now among scholars as to the original form of the 
ordinance, or as to how Jesus was baptized. But when we come to the 
crux of the question, it is this: Is the original form of baptism essen- 
tial to its validity in the church today? The question which Disciples 
and Baptists, and other immersionists have to face is, Are we justified 
in the face of present world conditions in making the form of the ordi- 
nance a barrier to church membership, when the spirit of obedience is 
there? That is a question that cannot be too hastily answered. We must 
consider the symbolic testimony of the ordinance as clearly indicated by 
Paul in Romans vi. 4, 5 and Col. 2:12. This difficulty about perpetuating 
the witnessing value of the ordinance to the resurrection of Christ is only 
partially met in the liberty which would be essential to any union for each 
one to practice what he conscientiously believes to be the teaching of 
the New Testament, on that subject. Meanwhile, it seems to me, that 
Congregationalists might well consider whether they could not, for the sake 
of union, yield a practice for which they would hardly claim any scriptural 
authority, namely, infant baptism, substituting therefor the consecration or 
dedication of infants to God by prayer and pledging parents to the bringing 
up of their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. This 
would be more catholic and less Roman Catholic, and would make the union 
much easier for Disciples who consider faith as essential to any valid bap- 
tism. Congregationalists do not believe in baptismal regeneration any 
more than Disciples. 

If the proposed conference of the two bodies through this joint com- 
mittee of one hundred meets in this spirit, and each should show this 


disposition to find a common basis of union, it seems possible to me that 
a way might be found by which each body of believers might be allowed 
liberty of conscience to practice what each believes tc be Christ's will, 
within the bonds of a common fellowship — a consummation devoutly to be 
wished. But each must seek to view the problem from the other 's point of 

One thing is certain: There must be liberty of conscience in any 
union that is practicable or profitable. If we are large enough to grant 
this mutual liberty, then the question is occurring to some leaders whether 
it would not be far better to unite on the fundamental agreements of the 
two bodies of Christians, and allow liberty in the matter of form, than to 
remain separate, contrary to our Lord 's prayer for the union of his followers. 
Not all of us Disciples or Congregationalists have reached this conclusion, 
but the spirit in which we approach this problem will have much to do 
in determining the ultimate decision. One thing is sure we cannot promote 
unity by creating division. We have got to be patient with all dissenters, 
and seek to bring all to the unity of the faith in the bonds! of peace. This 
will require time for the educational process and the growth of fraternity. 

Dr. Buckham says : 

There is much in common between the Disciples ' body and ourselves, as 
the report of the comity committees at the Columbus Council pointed out, 
and as Dr. Garrison's letter indicates. It is true that we have always 
placed more value upon theology than they, but it is also true that we have 
learned, through sad experience, what they were born into, that only the 
simple things are essential: God, the Spirit, Christ and his teachings, 
and the life of love and service. On church government we are practically 
agreed. Forms and sacraments have their place, but surely it is second- 
ary and, need not keep us apart. 

The question of baptism can certainly be adjusted. Infant baptism — 
or ' l pedo-baptism, ' ? as it used to be called — has decidedly the worst of 
the argument, both historically and logically, and might well bo given up 
for our own sakes as well as for the sake of union. Much of the signifi- 
cance of baptism lies in the fact that its reception is an act of faith. It 
is true that the faith of the parent may in a very beautiful sense become 
sponsor lor the yet unborn faith of the child. But that for which infant 
baptism has stood, at least in our Congregational ancestry — the spiritual 
unity of the family — is fully conserved in that which it has now virtually 
become — a service of dedication. It would require but little alteration to 
make infant baptism wholly a rite of dedication. 

The writer cannot forget how earnestly this step was urged, as one 
which would bring Congregutionalists and Baptists nearer together, by one 
whose prophetic voice is now silent — Prof. Rauschenbusch, in a conversation 
in 1915, when the latter was lecturing at the Pacific School of Religion. 
Would such a step cause our Episcopalian and Presbyterian brethren to 
stumble, or block the way of affiliation with them? It may be so. Surely 
the way toward unity is hedged with difficulties. 

As to the method of baptism — in case we should adopt adult baptism — 
surely there need be no serious obstacle. Granted that historical investi- 
gation, as Dr. Garrison asserts, is strongly in favor of immersion as the 
original form, yet the form, as he himself seems willing to concede, does not 
greatly matter. If one has any question on that issue let him turn to one of 
the oldest and most authoritative of Christian documents, the ' ' Didache ' ' or 
'■■' Teaching of the Apostles," written probably before 120 A. D., in which 
it is stated: "Concerning baptism, baptize thus: Having first rehearsed 
all these things, ( baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of 


the Holy Spirit' in running water; but if thou hast no running water bap- 
tize in other water and if thou canst not in cold, then in warm. But if 
thou hast neither, pour water three times on the head, 'in the Name of 
the Father, Son and Holy Ghost.' " (Section VII.) (See "The Apos- 
tolic Father" in the Loeb Classical Library, p. 321.) 

Nothing could be clearer than that as to the superiority of spiritual 
meaning to method. Long established custom or preference might well be 
the principle on which the individual church should determine, its own 
method of baptism — and all other similar matters as well. 

As to confessional requirements of admission to the church, the convic- 
tion that the utmost simplicity and the use of New Testament terms is 
best, is now almost universal among Congregationalists, with the emphasis 
upon faith in Christ and diseipleship to Him. 

In The World To-morrow, New York, Bishop Paul 
Jones, in writing of "A Christian Essential," says: 

See in how small a degree the divisions between the churches are due to 
real difference of understanding or of interpretation of the Christian spirit. 
It is rather the way they do things that is the stumbling block to any 
kind of unity. Each church says to the other, "I will show thee a more 
excellent way"; for it is far easier to establish and measure customs of 
polity, ways of worship and rules of conduct, than it is) to foster the spirit 
which makes a man a new creature in Christ. 

Under the title "Christ — the Constructive Bevolu- 
tionary," Canon B. H. Streeter, of Hereford, writing in 
The Constructive Quarterly, says : 

Christ was essentially a critic of tradition; but especially of religious 
tradition — whether on its theological, moral, or ecclesiastical side. No 
small part of His recorded utterances consists in criticisms of contemporary 
conceptions of the character of God, of current notions of right conduct or 
of that ecclesiastical tradition by which the word of God was made of 
none effect. Another point to notice is that He was a severer critic of 
the Church than of ' ' the world. ? ' Both on the doctrinal and on the practi- 
cal side He stigmatized its failure. Taking the commandment "Love God, 
love your neighbour, ' ' as the test or criterion of true and real religion, 
He found that the theologies, the moralities, the ecclesiastical ordinances 
of His time tended to disguise and overlay, or even to make impossible, 
the weightier matters of the law. 

Again : 

And what should be our- own attitude towards the Historic Church? 
The axe is laid at the root of the tree, the year is given to dig and to 
tend. I have a confidence the Church is not dead but sleeping. I hope 
and believe that Jerusalem even in this her hour will recognize the things 
which belong to her peace, and that the Christian Church to-day, unlike 
the Jewish Church of old, may have the insight and the courage to face 
that Constructive Revolution — in theology, in forms of worship, in organiza- 
tion, in practical activity — which is the condition of its realizing its destiny 
for the uplifting of mankind. 


To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — May I express my satisfaction with your editorial in 
the October number on ' ' Have Denominational Schools a Moral Right 
of Existence?' 7 You asked a most searching question and answered it 
cogently. The strictly denominational school, controlled and adminis- 
tered in that narrow interest, confining its funds to its own students, 
using a curriculum which pujfcs its sectarian stamp on its graduates, is 
out of date. It should consider a limited number of alternatives. If 
it remains under denominational control, it should at least liberalize its 
funds and curriculum so as to train on equal, non-sectarian terms stu- 
dents from all quarters. Or, such a school would take a more forward 
step by making itself undenominational in constitution, board of control 
and faculty, and so inevitably in curriculum, inner life and outgrowing 
service. Better yet would be cooperation and federation of such un- 
denominational schools as are near enough for the purpose. And best of 
all would be unions of many small schools into a few splendidly equipped 
ones, established at great educational centers in the mighty currents of 
the world's life, among cosmopolitan populations which furnish labora- 
tories for training and fields for service. 

Such a movement toward breadth and union is the more urgent 
because Christian service has grown so multiform. Ordained ministers 
are now but one among many groups of religious leaders. It is even 
more true of the rest than of ministers they they need not and should 
not be trained in denominational schools and given sectarian character. 
The war has taught our soldiers and sailors, our Christian workers 
among them, and multitudes of us at home, that the great essentials of 
faith and life are the same for us all, that smaller things have trivial 
rights, that our churches stand apart on non-essentials and that it is 
folly to attempt the vast moral and religious conflict of the world with 
divided forces. 

Our theological faculties are composed of men accepted among the 
foremost leaders of the churches. They are a powerful force whether 
for or against advance. In this mighty day of vast proportions, when 
misery and sin are seen in huge and naked bulk, when no good work need 
be small and slow, when gigantic forces can be levied and led to im- 
mense and decisive victory, when divisive and puny effort is contemned 
by modern men who are doing the rest of the world's work in great 
ways, our theological schools should turn their total united power into 
the forward movement. Should this be the way of sacrifice, it would 
prove to be the way of life. 

Yours very sincerely, 

Berkeley, Calif. C. S. Nash, 

President of the Pacific School of Religion. 


To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — A union theological seminary movement is bound to 
come and I should personally be favorable to such a movemen,t and in- 



terested in it. I see no reasons why studies, which come to all schools 
might not be pursued by more students alike and provisions made for 
special instruction in matters of denomination of history and polity. 
I doubt whether the church is quite ready for a plan which would wipe 
out entirely the denominational inheritance in the past; nor am I sure 
that this would be desirable, even if possible. 

If the theological students of today were to study together, it 
would be easier for them as the ministers of tomorrow, to work together 
in closer harmony, and with more cordial cooperation. 

Very sincerely yours, 

Evanston, 111. Charles M. Stuart, 

President of Garrett Biblical Institute. 



To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — According to your request, I send you my opinion con- 
cerning the views which have been so clearly stated in the Editorial en- 
titled, "Have Denominational Schools the Moral Right of Existence V 

1. The change proposed in theological seminaries if it originated 
with the denominational bodies themselves would undoubtedly be pro- 
ductive of emphasis on those essential matters in which such bodies agree, 
and would lead to the publication of these matters in the open, 
while non-essential matters which are divisive would be presented in the 
corner. But even then no real unity of spirit or cooperation would re- 
sult so long as the denominations themselves continue on their present 
divisive bases. The seminary ordinarily is a product of the denomination 
rather than aproducer of it. The denomination, itself, therefore, must 
be reborn in the spirit of unity first; then the seminary will become the 
expression of that rebirth. 

2. There are denominational seminaries (I am acquainted with one 
at least) in which the effort is constantly made to inculcate the teach- 
ings of unity so that every man going out from them shall (a) recognize 
the validity of ordination in other denominations and the validity of the 
sacraments as administered in other denominations; (b) cooperate 
heartily in all matters of community welfare; (c) plant churches or mis- 
sions only in accord with a well denned and cordially executed interde- 
nominational comity; (d) make denominational ties and denominational 
efforts absolutely secondary to the welfare of the Kingdom, not a means 
of building up the denomination, but a means of building up the work 
of God. Given such a seminary attitude and such insistent instruction 
in seminary classrooms and conferences, and actual unity is well on 
its way. 

3. Personally I would be glad if each denomination today would 
state exactly what those features are in every other denomination that are 
the hindrances why it cannot unite in full and reciprocal fellowship 
of spirit and of work with the other denominations. As a teacher of 
church polity I am well aware of the part that definitions of the church 
and of the ministry and of the administration of the sacraments have 
in keeping denominations apart. Ecclesiasticism is a very important 
factor in the divisions of Christianity. Some persons claim that it is the 
most important factor, introducing and sustaining such divisions. As a 
Presbyterian, I should be much pleased if Methodists, Lutherans, Epis- 
copalians and others would state in brief terms what they wish the Presby- 
terian Church in the U. S. A. to change, indicating what is wrong in our 


attitude and standards in order that they and we may be one. Then let 
the Presbyterians do the same for the other denominations. In some 
such way, and only in some such way, so far as I can see, can we reach 
real unity. General sentiment in favor of unity, however beautiful it 
sounds and however unctuously it is expressed, will, I fear, produce 
very little result until we actually face the definite matters that keep us 
apart — matters that always must keep us apart until they are changed. 
As the relation now stands, there are, (I fear again) principles of polity 
existing among our Protestant bodies that make real unity between these 
bodies impossible. When those principles of polity are changed, and 
only then, the dawn of the day of unity will have come. 

Chicago, 111. James G. K. McClure, 

President of McCormick Theological Seminary. 



To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — Your editorial on denominational schools has interested 
me greatly, not least because I find myself in emphatic dissent from the 
principles you advocate. I am quite ready to recognize the dangers that 
attach to denominational training, but they, in my belief, spring from the 
spirit in which such training has been given and not from the thing itself. 
Holding as I do that every body of Christians has vital hold upon actual 
truth and that such hold is more far reaching and penetrating than the 
reach of any individual members of the group, I cannot help feeling that, 
for the effective interpretation of their particular trust, men need in 
their days of training the close and intimate participation in the cor- 
porate life of their communion that only the denominational seminaries 
can give. For example, I have too profound a respect for the values in- 
herent in Methodism to suppose that these values can be adequately rep- 
resented by one or two Methodist prof essorsi engaged with others in teach- 
ing a mixed group of students. It is not simply a question of a few 
definite principles which can be clearly annunciated. Methodism includes 
a method of approach, a pervasive influence that affects almost every 
field of theological study. Undenominational seminaries would make for 
undenominationalism generally, and that means to me the obscuring of the 
manifold richness of the Christian faith and way of life until all fades 
into a drear monotone. In the field of politics. I believe that a true in- 
ternationalism will include undimmed all the varied gifts of the nations 
and draw its strength from the vitality of a true nationalism. Just so, 
I believe that the way to unity lies through a deeper understanding of 
our particular inheritances and a finer loyalty to the great traditions of 
which we are a part. In all this, however, I acknowledge the need of a 
readier recognition of the sincerity and loyalty of those who do not share 
our own traditions. 

Yours faithfully, 

New York City. Hughell Fosbroke, 

Dean of The General Theological Seminary. 



To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — The last official statistics obtainable state that the theo- 
logical schools in the United States now number one hundred and sixty-nine. 


They are distributed among the various religious bodies, and sustained by 
them, as follows: Roman Catholic 28; Lutheran 25; Presbyterian 23; 
Methodist 22; Baptist 15; Episcopalian 14; Disciples 11; Congregation- 
alist 10; all others 24. In them are 1,422 teachers and 12,051 students. 
The real estate (land and buildings) is valued at $24,321,211, and the 
endowments total $40,895,681. 

Adding properties not included in the above, as the cost of libraries 
for instance, here is a truly vast sum measuring the effort and sacrifice 
of the churches of America, approaching one hundred millions of dol- 
lars. It is a fair question that comes from the donors to those who bear 
the responsibility of stewardship, are we administering this great trust 
bestowed, with economy and wisdom? And, in passing, it is to be noted, 
that this inquiry, not in the spirit of unfriendly criticism, is now heard 
more and more. 

The careful consideration of the problem propounded suggests views 
of these training schools of the several denominations from varying 
points affording diverse perspective. First, the relation of these seminaries 
to each other. This inquiry, in the very beginning startles one; and, 
for the very reason, though the oldest of these schools have already 
observed their centennials, there have been few relationships, even among 
those of the same communion. Only in recent months, the oldest of our 
universities, discerning this fact of the lack of cooperation, invited the 
representatives of about half the schools to meet in conference, three days, 
as the guests of Harvard. Fifty-three of the institutions responded and 
were represented by eighty of their teachers. The work of the Christ 
in the United States and Canada was admirably viewed in a programme, 
wrought out with rare perspicacity, from the standpoint of the ministry. 
It was the first meeting of this character the schools had ever held, and 
the spirit of a cordial fellowship was marked indeed. May it result 
in hearty cooperation hereafter. 

The relation of these many schools to their denominations varies 
greatly. Some of the seminaries are virtually independent. Others are 
sadly hampered by ecclesiastical restraint. Local influence, rather than 
national needs, makes many of the institutions provincial. The dis- 
tribution of the schools cries out for immediate action. In twenty-three 
states of the union, there are no divinity schools. On the other hand, 
there is a most unfortunate congestion in others. A loud call is heard 
everywhere for consolidation; for example, the Lutherans have 25, almost 
as many as the Roman Catholics. The fourteen denominations, bearing 
the name Presbyterian, yet having no official relations with each other, 
have 23 theological colleges, three times as many as are needed. There 
are cities having six, seven, eight and even nine schools; while other 
great centers of population have not one. More than one hundred 
denominations in America have no theological seminaries at all. A wise 
mobilization of the educational forces of the churches is imperatively 

The relation of the schools, not alone to each other and to their 
denominations, but to the people, requires our most serious consideration. 
Of all the many types of educational institutions, no one is so far removed 
from the life and thought of the day. This great gulf must be bridged 
even if fewer men lead cloistered lives as hermits, giving their years to 
the dative case. Professors in vital and sympathetic touch with the life 
and problems of the churches are now needed. The studies of the 
classroom should partake more largely of the humanities even if theology 
be less ll systematic. M A larger liberty must be given the student. It 
were better if all the school-grist should not be ground through the one 
hopper; for gifts and aptitudes widely differ, and specialization grows 


in evidence in the ministry of the churches. The work of the faculties 
should reach out, not solely to the classrooms, but to the student before 
he enters the school, and the graduate after he goes forth. This enlarged 
sphere of usefulness would make the yearly totals on ledgers look more 
favorable; for, as it is at present, theological education is far and away 
the most costly in America. 

This needed mobilization of seminary forces in the theological schools, 
the training camps for Christ's army would bring new incentive and faith 
to teachers and students. It would pluck the fly out of the ointment as 
the seminary stands, apologetically, pleading for recognition and adequate 
support. Furthermore, it would successfully eliminate a competition from 
two sources, which daily becomes more powerful and threatening, namely, 
first from the larger universities, which are at present openly appealing 
to the more scholarly of their students to prepare, by graduate work, for 
the varying forms of the Master's work. And, second, from the so-called 
Bible-schools, which have raised the cry that the teaching in our seminaries 
may be philosophic but is no longer primarily biblical. And these schools 
of so comparatively a new type are not only getting the ear of the public 
but the young men and the young women of the people. We must <f get 
together" if we are to live. 

Sincerely yours, 

E. Lyman Hood, 

Atlanta, Ga. President Atlanta Theological Seminary. 


To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — The answer to the question which you propound as to 
whether denominational schools of theology have a moral right to con- 
tinue under the new conditions that confront the Christian Church de- 
pends on the answer to be given to the larger question as to whether 
the religious denominations of Protestant Christianity (not to extend the 
question further) have served the purpose and accomplished the ends for 
which they were providentially called into existence. 

The time was when the Christian Church, in its unity, became an 
autocratic and even despotic ecclesiasticism, using its authority to com- 
pel not only uniformity in religious belief and modes of worship but 
abject obedience to whatever rules and regulations were prescribed and 
imposed. In so far as it was resistance to an ecclesiastical autocracy 
which thus undertook to force uniformity in matters of faith and wor- 
ship where perfect liberty should have been allowed that produced those 
divisions in the Church which we call denominations, it was a wise and 
beneficent movement, and the perpetuation of these denominations was 
not only desirable but necessary for the preservation of religious liberty, 
and the highest interests of the Christian religion were promoted by such 
divisions. So long as it is necessary or desirable, for the preservation of 
Christian liberty and a pure Christian faith, to perpetuate the religious 
denominations in their separateness, denominational colleges and theological 
schools are not only advantageous but necessary. 

But whenever the time comes that perfect freedom in all matters of 
religious faith and worship is enjoyed by all, and there is practical 
agreement and unity as to all the great essentials of Christian faith and 
duty, and perfect liberty in non-essentials, then, it may be reasonably 
claimed, the religious denominations will have accomplished their great 
and all important mission, and from this time on the highest efficiency 


of the Church can be secured only through unity and union, through 
cooperation and concentration. The greatest need of the modern Chris- 
tian Church is for such a union and distribution of all Christian forces 
as shall make their utilization in the accomplishment of the common 
Christian task in the highest degree efficient by making impossible need- 
less and hurtful denominational rivalries and prevent the dissipation 
and waste of manhood and money in maintaining sectarian interests 
at the expense of the larger interests of the Kingdom — and yet accomplish 
this beneficent result in a manner that will rob no man of his present 
Christian liberty in matters of faith and worship. 

Nothing in the modern Christian Church is so promotive of de- 
nominational separateness and the perpetuation of the present sectarian 
divisions in the church as denominational schools of theology in which 
the distinguishing doctrines and tenets and practices of the denomination 
controlling the school are emphasized as the things of primary value and 
importance in the education of the young minister. But it should be 
said that the faculties in many of the strongest and best denominational 
schools of theology are so catholic minded and fraternal, and so little 
in sympathy with emphasizing sectarianism in matters of doctrine and 
polity and ritual, that they would themselves heartily welcome and enter 
into any movement that would throw them into closer educational fellow- 
ship and cooperation with Christian scholars of other churches than their 
own. It is doubtless also true that a large majority of the young min- 
isters of the Protestant church of today are so much in sympathy with 
the growing spirit of catholicity and Christian unity that if left to them- 
selves to select their own theological schools, uninfluenced by ecclesiastical 
pressure of any kind, they would prefer a school where they could mingle, 
during their days of preparatory study, with young ministers of all the 
evangelical churches, and where they could come under the instruction 
of the best Christian scholarship, regardless of the ecclesiastical affilia- 
tions of the scholars themselves. I do not know of anything that would 
promote genuine Christian catholicity and cooperation and bring about 
Christian unity both visible and invisible among the various denominations 
so speedily and so effectually as the transformation of denominational 
into interdenominational schools of theology and the consequent education 
of the young ministers of these various denominations together in inter- 
denominational theological seminaries. One generation of young ministers 
thus educated would speedily solve the problem of church unity. 

Nashville, Tenn. W. F. Tillett, 

Dean of Vanderbilt University School of Eeligion. 


To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — You have honored me by asking an expression of my 
opinion on the editorial ' ' Have Denominational Schools a Moral Right of 
Existence V which appears in The Christian Union Quarterly for Octo- 
ber, 1918. I can only do so, if I may be allowed to speak quite frankly, — 
though, I trust, in a courteous and Christian spirit. 

With the end for which that editorial yearns, I am in profound sym- 
pathy. A divided church seems to me the tragedy of tragedies, — unless 
indeed the imperfect and unintelligent discipleship of those who ' ' profess 
and call themselves Christians' ' is more tragic, as it certainly is the ulti- 
mate root and cause of division. I am firmly convinced that reunion must 
be had; and that to gain it we must all be ready, not to forget or de- 
preciate the convictions that make up our differences, but to trust to the 


inherent power of truth to prove itself, and so trusting must be ready to 
enter upon peace conferences with few or no reservations or conditions. 
Personally, I am ready to take this stand, and ready to see my communion 
take it. For I trust the Spirit of Truth. 

But I cannot feel that an attempt to end or transform the ' ' denomina- 
tion schools' ' will at present prove practicable or wise, or truly helpful; 
though I am ready to believe that even now some of our seminaries might 
profitably be abandoned, or combined. In the main, however, I am firmly 
persuaded that the "denominational school' ' must be maintained for the 
present at least, and strengthened, — much as I also hold that its spirit 
cannot any longer remain narrowly belligerent and sectarian. I feel 
strongly three points, — among others: 

(1) Probably all such schools are in possession of trust funds given 
for a specific purpose. I cannot see that it is now possible to divert 
those funds to purposes that are not those for which they were given. 
Important, practically, as this matter is, I do not count it a permanent 
difficulty. When the separated churches become one organically, this diffi- 
culty will be soluble: but till then it seems to me a barrier that is final. 
We cannot do evil that good may come; abuse an existent, even if subor- 
dinate trust, in order to fufill a yet larger trust. The final solution must 
be true to both. 

(2) I am more than ready to grant that "denominational schools'' 
have in the past propagated, and still do in considerable measure, propa- 
gate, the spirit of divisiveness ; and that in so far forth they do the 
devil's work. On the other hand, I firmly believe that many if not most 
of our separate churches bear witness to some aspect or other of God's 
truth that is constructive and important and that is needed for the ful- 
ness and perfection of the reunited and truly catholic church. And in 
so far as the ' ' denominational school ' ' stands for this aspect of truth it 
has, I hold, a positive and precious contribution to make. This seems 
to me true of the schools within my own communion: their churchmanship, 
as we say, differs very greatly; and I for one believe we have need of 
them all. And I do not see how this varied witness could be borne if they 
were merged. A single institution can hardly develop with equal strength 
of conviction the High Church and the Low Church view; just as no in- 
dividual can be both these at once with equal vigor and intelligence. The 
differences are not superficial, neither are they based solely upon intel- 
lectual opinions: they reach down deep into temperament and fundamental 
outlook. Consequently, each cannot find its most complete expression save 
by embodiment, as it were, in different individuals and different institu- 
tions. I do not wish therefore to see our various and varied seminaries 
merged into one; though I hope and pray for a closer intimacy, coop- 
eration and mutual understanding. And if the "denominational school" 
will only stand for its own interpretation of Christianity in the true Spirit 
of Christ, I believe it will prove rather a help than a hindrance to the 
ultimate reunion of Christendom. In a plea for this spirit of brotherli- 
ness, and for a casting out of narrow sectarianism, I should heartily join; 
whereas I cannot join, at least now, in advocating the elimination or 
merger of "denominational schools." 

(3) Finally, is not such a proposal a putting of the cart before the 
horse? Denominational seminaries exist as an expression, or, if you so 
please, as a sympton of denominationalism. Is not the wise process to- 
wards a cure to deal not with the symptons, but with the disease? I 
do not wholly like my figure of speech here; for I am firmly persuaded 
that many of our divisions are for truth's sake, in part, and that the 
truth they bear witness to must be conserved. Your proposal appears 


to me based upon the assumption that we can reach reunion by a process 
of cancelling the denominational differences; and up to a certain point 
I agree to this. But a point comes when these differences are of great 
and vital significance; and I for one cannot imagine reunion that does 
not recognize and provide for them;. To reduce our theological teaching 
to the lowest possible minimum and thereby to secure agreement and re- 
union, strikes me as fatuous, — even as a failure in the love of truth. I 
am quite aware that the opposite effort, — that of comprehension, — looks 
and probably is far slower and even more difficult. Yet I believe it to be 
the only way to reach an abiding and worthwhile reunion of Christendom. 
It is for this that I wish to work. And it is because this appears to me 
the. only thing worth working for that I would deplore any steps towards 
reunion that sought the goal of a mere wiping away of divergencies. For 
until we reach this higher goal, to do away with the agencies which teach 
our respective grasps of truth would, in my opinion, be simply suicidal, — or 
rather, still more, unfaithful. The catholic church of the future must not 
only insist upon the fundamentals, but must also comprehend all there is 
of truth, — its overtones. 

It is well, I am sure, to raise the question which this editorial deals 
with, in the interest of clear thinking; and I thank you for having done 

Yours very truly, 
Philadelphia, Pa. George G. Baxtlett, 

Dean of the Philadelphia Protestant Episcopal Divinity School. 


To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — I have read carefully the editorial on denominational 
theological schools in the October issue of The Christian Union Quarterly. 
The illustration from the unified command of the allied armies is 
interesting; but it does not prove the proposition. It is possible to have 
unified command and still maintain the different nationalities of the 
fighting forces with their national schools for the training of soldiers and 
sailors. If by a denominational divinity school is meant an institution 
which indoctrinates its students with the idea that they have a monopoly 
of Christian truth or that theirs is the only Christian church, then 
such faculties and students are a religious nuisance. But if a denomina- 
tional school may be loyal to its own tradition and heritage while pre- 
senting and holding Christian truth in hospitality of spirit, then I be- 
lieve that such an institution is not only warranted but necessary. Chicago 
Theological Seminary is a Congregational graduate school of theology 
located at the University of Chicago, but maintaining its own autonomy. 
More students of other denominations are trained in its courses than 
representatives of its supporting denomination. There is the largest 
catholicity of teaching in its faculty; but we are Congregationalists in 
conviction and practice. Personally I believe that we must seek Chris- 
tian unity of spirit and service; but I do not feel the need of uniformity 
of organization or ritual. I believe that real Christian union may for 
the present be best promoted by variety of forms expressing essential 
unity of spirit and temper. And to this ideal the denominational theo- 
logical school is necessary. 

Yours faithfully, 

Chicago, HI. Ozora S. Davis, 

President of Chicago Theological Seminary. 



To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — I have read with care the editorial in the October issue of 
The Christian Union Quarterly, and believe the utterance timely. Per- 
haps in these reconstruction times there will be a well denned tendency 
on the part of theological institutions to gravitate toward common strategic 
centers, where greater opportunities may be afforded their students for 
complete preparation for the Christian ministry. This unification of ef- 
fort could be accomplished without loss in so far as the peculiar and dif- 
ferentiating teachings of the various communions are concerned, each 
religious body having an opportunity of presenting to its own candidates 
the peculiarities of faith and practice characteristic of its life. I am of 
the opinion, however, that such a unification will not come until the min- 
isters and leading laymen of the various communities are made to see the 
importance of such a move, and are willing to cooperate most heartily with 
the theological seminaries. 

Fraternally yours, 

Lexington, Ky. R. H. Crossfield, 

President of Transylvania College. 


To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — The extent of changes taking place in all the realms of 
human thought and action, as the result of the world war, is probably not 
as great as popularly represented. That there are great changes no one 
questions. Many of them, however, are on the surface and will be shown 
by maps, geographical lines, national organizations and attitudes — polit- 
ical and religious. Few will be the changes in fundamentals, either in 
education or religion. Some things hitherto considered essential will be 
relegated to the ' ' junk heap ; ' ' others held of lesser importance may be 
stressed as primary and foundational. 

The editor's statement "We are forced to look for other foundations 
(for both education and religion, n is not justified in the light of facts. 
What is the purpose of a church school education? What are the founda- 
tion stones of education as generally accepted? The purpose is to give 
knowledge of human situations. Courses of study in standardized in- 
stitutions must include history, sociology, ethics, science, philosophy and 
theology. Such courses may be supplemented by many others, but these 
are absolutely essential to show a student human situations and how to 
adjust himself to them. The world war may modify some of these, but 
it will eliminate none and will substitute nothing therefor. 

Religion related to education as taught in denominational schools 
includes fundamentals of Christianity believed and taught since the days 
of the Apostles. The separation of church and state in America precludes 
the teaching of theology in state institutions. The leadership in religion 
and religious education must be obtained where the Bible is used as a 
text book. The war has not changed the concepts of Christianity con- 
cerning God, Jesuis Christ, the Holy Spirit and the New Testament church, 
with its ordinances and spirit. Emphasis may be deflected to some 
doctrines and tenets more than to others, but the world war has not so 
"upset past notions of religion r ' that no subsills remain under it. 

Division in the church is tragic. It is not in harmony with the will 
of Christ. However, the federation of churches does not promise that unity 


for which Jesus prayed; neither will the federation of denominational 
schools give assurance of Christianity. If denominational schools com- 
bine their contribution to the life and spirit of our republic, give 
them a moral right to exist. Such separation and lack of cooperation 
have been handicaps to the progress of Christianity and toward the at- 
tainment of highest scholastic standards. There is no present substitute 
for the church school. If denominational schools combine in regional parts 
of our country, with sufficient endowment to do standardized work and 
compete with institutions maintained by state taxes, the faculties of such 
institutions of higher learning could possibly ignore religious differences 
of patrons and continue instruction until patronage would become popular; 
but conditions now prevailing in the United States will strangle any) at- 
tempt to federate such institutions of learning. A number of cases can 
be cited to support this conclusion. Foreign fields differ from the home- 
land interpreted to our disparity and regret. I would hail with delight 
the closing of every breach in the wall about the fold for the sheep of 
our Lord and rejoice in the hanging of the gate where one PORTER 
should know His sheep and be known of Him. Until that time comes, all 
we can do is to give in the spirit of life the clearest, fullest conception 
of the sublime ideas of Christianity. The schools must continue to train 
the men to carry such messages back by character. 

Very sincerely yours, 
East Enid, Okla. I. N. McCash, 

President of Phillips University. 



To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — I have read with great interest your editorial in The 
Christian Union Quarterly with reference to denominational schools and 
their moral right of existence. Personally I am heartily in favor of federa- 
tion or cooperation wherever theological seminaries are located in the 
same community. Organic union is not legally possible, even if it is the 
ultimate ideal, because such institutions have the denominational feature 
written into the civil charter as well as the ecclesiastical. Federation, 
however much we desire it, will never be possible until the communions to 
which the institutions belong come closer together, for in my judgment 
the chief obstacle to such movements is not usually found in the intel- 
ligent leaders but in the rank and file of the churches. The first step 
necessary is for the various denominations of Christians to come into 
closer relations, to federate if possible, or to go one step further and 
arrange an organic union, and the theological seminaries, like the mis- 
sionary boards, will automatically come together. The seminaries where 
exegesis, theology, and church history are taught scientifically are paving 
the way for the realization of the ideals of church unity. On the other 
hand, the institutions in which these subjects are presented from a partisan 
point of view and in a sectarian spirit are lending themselves to perpetuate 
the schisms of Protestant Christianity. In fairness such a discrimination 
should be made. In closing I might state that at the Western Theological 
Seminary students of all denominations are received and are entitled to 
equal privileges, and every year we have representatives from several 
communions in addition to those of the Presbyterian Church. 

Very sincerely yours, 

Pittsburgh, Pa. James A. Kelso, 

President of the Western Theological Seminary. 



To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — Referring to the October number of The Christian 
Union Quarterly, I believe in Christian union. This commits me also to 
the programme of the union of denominational colleges and seminaries. 
The logic of events and the spirit of the times must eventually lead to such 
desirable consummation. 

This is far different, of course, from advocating independent colleges, 
responsible only to their boards of trustees. As against such colleges, I 
would much prefer the state college. Education, without Christ, is to 
my mind worse than ignorance. The only hope of democracy is a Chris- 
tian people, and the only assurance of such a people is a system of 
Christian colleges, equal in dignity and scope with the tax-supported schools 
which from their very nature cannot teach religion. 

But as things are now, I should stoutly defend the denominational 
college, controlled by a single denomination, looking hopefully to the time 
when our Lord's prayer for the oneness of His people shall be answered 
in a united church, maintaining its system of Christian schools as the 
backbone of its own uplifting life. 

I would not destroy the good we have, but would see it transformed 
into the better we so sorely need. 


Elon College, N. C. W. A. Harper, 

President Elon College. 


To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — I am interested in and working for Christian unity. We 
cannot establish a permanent peace and the democracy of the world unless 
we are united. Protestant denominations, Orthodox communions, Catholics 
and Old Catholics all have the same Lord and one Saviour, Jesus Christ. 
Why should we not be united in spirit and truth? 

Most respectfully yours, 
Duryea, Pa. T. V. Jakimowicz, 

Rector of the P. N. Catholic Church, 

Virgin Mary of Czenstochowa. 

To the Editor of The Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — It is with some sense of satisfaction that I can forward 
you the information of the following facts relating to our religious activity. 

The General Conference of laymen of various Christian denominations 
was held in Tozansho, Y. M. C. A. building, commencing on the 2nd of 
August and ending on the 6th. The site of ~ the conference was about 
two miles from Gotemba station of the Tokaido line near Fujiyama. 
The congregation numbered 110 on the third day. Among them there 
were four well known ministers of the Presbyterian denomination — Rev. 
Mr. Uemura, Rev. Mr. Koraki, Rev. Mr. Ebina and Rev. Mr. Ibuka, be- 
sides a few women visitors. The laymen assembled represented the va- 
rious denominations of the whole country, but most of them belonged to 
the Nippon Kirisuto Kyokai (Presbyterian), Kumiai Kyokai (Congrega- 
tional) , Shinrei Kyokai (Baptist), and Methodist and there were only two 
men from our Nippon Seikokai (Anglican Church). 


The whole proceedings are too lengthy to mention, but there is one 
thing that prompted me to write you this letter. I borrow here Dr. 
Vance 's expression as quoted in The Quarterly just received. Through- 
out the meeting " there is a great wave of hunger for unity at this time 
and if the way continues to be blockaded by ecclesiastical leaders the masses 
(laymen) will arise and decide for themselves. ' ' That such energy per- 
vaded the whole congregation there was not the slightest doubt. In con- 
sequence of the high tone for unity thus prevailing in the Conference, 
the committee for furthering the object of Christianizing Japan was 
elected, twelve in number and after many discussions the following reso- 
lution was passed: 

"We, the laymen, present at the conference held on the 5th of the 
8th month of the 7th year of Taisho hereby agree to endeavor with har- 
monious cooperation to propagate Christianity in Japan and to make every 
effort to infuse the spirit for the unity of all Christian denominations in 
accordance with the will of God. " 

The meetings were mostly conducted under the leadership of Mr. 
Nagawo Hampei, the director of the Central Railway Bureau. He was 
the promoter of uniting, some years ago, two or three Presbyterian de- 
nominations in Moji City, naming it hence Godo Kyokai, or the United 
Church and is a great advocate of Christian unity. 

Yours faithfully, 

828 Mirami Ota, Yokohama, Japan. S. T. Fujita. 


To the Editor of Tpie Christian Union Quarterly. 

Dear Sir: — It may be of interest to know of an effort towards union 
in this little community of Ceres, Stanislaus County, California. It is 
overchurched. The four churches cooperate, holding Sunday night union 
services, with union choir, in a large tabernacle, the pastors preaching in 
rotation. On "Wednesday night we have union prayer meetings. At Christ- 
mas we had a union community tree, it being, as last year, quite a success, in 
which old and young were educated to see how much they could give to 
the suffering Armenians and Syrians. 

May I add that in a recent visit to my former home and scenes of 
evangelistic labors in Australia, I rejoiced to find all Methodist churches, 
including Primitive Methodists, Free Methodists, Bible Christians, etc., 
united in the one Methodist Church. There was also but one young peo- 
ple's society, the Christian Endeavor. One night the Christian Endeavor 
Society of the Methodist Church came to the Christian Church. I gave 
up my pastoral position to the Methodist pastor and all other officers 
yielded to those of the visitors, who took charge and furnished the pro- 
gramme of the evening. Later we returned the visit and followed a like 
plan. At a district meeting and later at a state Christian Endeavor con- 
vention there answered to the roll call the Church of England, Lutherans, 
Baptists, Oongregationalists, Presbyterians and half a dozen other com- 
munions. At the annual state convention of Victoria, held in the big 
Masonic hall in the city of Melbourne, 1,200 were present, who joined 
in a most happy, fraternal spirit, animated by a most harmonious enthu- 
siasm. May this union work spread mightily. 

Ceres, Cal. J. W. Webb, 

Minister Christian Church. 


UNITY AND SCHISM. By Eev. T. A. Lacey, M. A. The Bishop Paddock 
Lectures for 1917. A. R. Mowbray & Co. London. 221 pages. 
$1.25 net. 

In selecting a dozen books on Christian Unity covering this generation, 
Mr. Lacey 's contribution would undoubtedly have a place. It is a book 
that wonderfully helps to clear the atmosphere in one's approach to the 
delicate and difficult problem of a united Christendom. The seven chap- 
ters which originally were seven lectures delivered on the Bishop Paddock 
Foundation of the General Theological Seminary, New York, are followed 
by lengthy appendices containing important documents and illustrations of 
theories examined, especially quotations from St. Ignatius, St. Cyprian, 

In the opening chapter, under the title "The Fundamental Idea", he 
maintains that the church becomes "a, larger Israel" founded in the unity 
of redeemed mankind, consequently including all races with one God the 
Father of all men and one Lord Jesus Christ incarnate in the common hu- 
manity. He says: "To achieve this, two things are necessary. On the 
one hand, the Gentile Christians must accept Hebrew origins ; they are made 
fellow heirs with the Jews, and the Fathers are become their fathers. St. 
Paul treats this as normal. He tells the Gentile converts, whose cause has 
triumphed under his leadership, that they were formerly 'alienated from 
the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of the prom- 
ise ; ' but now they that were once far off are made nigh with the blood 
of Christ. In this way a tradition was established which has proved con- 
stant. In the spread of Christendom through the world few things are 
more remarkable than the consent of converted nations to forget their own 
people and their father's house, their own origins and their own heroic age, 
accepting in substitution the history and legends, the heroics and the 
national memories of the Palestinian Hebrew." 

In the second and third chapters he discusses the episcopal and papal 
theories with unusual clearness and frankness. He finds in neither theory 
a satisfactory solution for the unity of the church. Of the first he says: 
' ' How can you make an articulus stantis out cadentis ecolesice of that which 
did not exist in the first age of the church? How can that be the one bond 
of unity, the lack of which did not prevent the church from being one and 
united in the day of St. Paul? You may insist on the necessity of the 
apostolic foundation; you may demand the continuity of the apostolic fel- 
lowship; you cannot require, for the fulfilment of either condition, an or- 
ganization of the church to which the apostles themselves were strangers. 
On the high ground of theory you must allow that any effective way of 
maintaining apostolic unity will suffice; on the broad ground of history 



you must observe that the way in use, the episcopal way, has been subject 
to modification. You must assume an apostolic origin for the institution 
of episcopacy, for no other account of it seems possible; but there is 
nothing to show that the apostles made it irrevocably the one and only 
safeguard of unity. Neither Ignatius nor Cyprian seems to be acquainted 
with any such tradition; they took episcopacy as a fact of experience, and 
you must be content to do the same. It was an instrument of unity; if 
you try to make it the only possible instrument, fixed and indispensable, 
you will put more upon it than the tradition warrants.' f 

Of the papal theory he is equally strong. He says: "Is the papal 
jurisdiction a guarantee of unity? Look round upon Christendom. It may 
hold together those who accept it without question. But that is sectarian 
unity, the unity of those who agree in a particular opinion. Is that the 
unity of the whole Church of Christ? The papacy has done great things, 
but there is one thing that it has not done; it has not held all Christians 
together. It has not held even the majority of them together. It has 
claimed too much. It has attempted more than could be done by the means 
employed. We must look elsewhere for the unity of the church. 

His fourth chapter deals with the sectarian conception. He meets 
this in the same spirit of fairness and leaves us this remarkable paragraph 
for our thought: "You should not look for sectarianism in those sects 
which you condemn. No doubt you will find it there, and will condemn it 
wholeheartedly. It is more important to look for it in yourself, and in those 
with whom you habitually act. You will find it when you adopt some facile 
rule for distinguishing tares and wheat. You will find it when you employ 
some convenient standard, set by the fashion of the day, for determining 
what is catholic or orthodox, enlightened or liberal. Your standard may be 
a part of the truth of God, but you can isolate it into a falsehood. Per- 
haps nowhere can you stumble more easily into sectarianism than in the 
search after unity. For sectarian unity, the unity of those who- pronounce 
a shibboleth in exactly the same way, is the easiest thing in the world to 
achieve. In despair of achieving a larger unity according to the will of 
God — which is one of the hardest of tasks — you may fall back on that easy 
course, and lapse into a contentment that is death. Beware of agreements. 
Agreement to differ is the worst kind; but agreement on selected articles 
may be a worse danger. It is a substitute for the unity of the body of 
Christ; and it is a substitute that satisfies." 

In the fifth chapter he discusses independency and denominationalism, 
calling the latter and rightfully so, "a, barbarous name. ' ' In the sixth 
chapter he discusses intercommunion and federation. He sees the insuffi- 
ciency in all this and says some fine things for the way out of the confu- 
sion. Regarding apostolic orders he says, "I turn to my other point: the 
obstinate question of the sacred ministry. You will find no way of escape 
in subtle distinctions between validity and regularity. To lay down abso- 
lutely what are the essentials of valid ordination is probably beyond the 
power of any ecclesiastical authority. ' The Lord knoweth them that are 


His ; ' the secret of acceptability is hidden within the divine knowledge. 
When a Congregationalist friend said to me, 'I reckon myself as good a 
priest as you, and as good a bishop as the Bishop of London,' I had no 
answer. You cannot show peremptorily that such an one is not a priest of 
the Most High God. But the pastors of the church can say, and ought to 
say, that no man shall be allowed to minister to their flock unless there is 
ample cause for believing him to be truly admitted to the sacred ministry. 
They have not to prove a negative against him; they have to make good the 
affirmative. And there seems to be only one way of doing this. A man 
ordained according to the immemorial practice of the Catholic Church needs 
no further credential; without this, his title remains at least in doubt. ,J 

The last chapter deals with brotherhood and is a fitting close to a 
remarkably clear survey of the whole field of unity and schism. He says: 
"Brethren. Brothers do not cease to be brothers when they are divided 
by a family quarrel. Nor does the family cease to be one because it is 
divided. Nor can you rebuild it on federal principles.. Not federation, but 
whole-hearted reconciliation is needed. The Christian Church is one family, 
and Christians are brothers. It is a fact, not an aspiration. All Chris- 
tians are brothers. Orthodox and heretic, Catholic and schismatic, 
all are brothers. It is because they are brothers that heresy and 
schism are sins. We are, in point of fact, one divided family, and the first 
step towards reconciliation is the acknowledgment of brotherhood. That 
means repentance. We need not look curiously into the origins of schism; 
that is the way to self -exculpation. We are not called to the easy and 
pleasant but unprofitable task of lamenting the sins of our fathers, and 
building the tombs of the prophets whom they slew. We are called to repent 
of our own sins; not of one another's sins, but of our own; the sins by 
which we have perpetuated discord. And repentance means renunciation. 
We are not to cast away things tried and proved, in a vain hope of mutual 
accommodation; but there are sacrifices to be made before those things 
are approached. A sacrifice should be the giving of something that we 
value, something of cost. And it must be offered, not in hope of gain — 
for then it is no sacrifice, — but as an act of love. We must listen to the 
cry, albeit raised by discordant voices, ' Sirs, ye are brethren ! ' 7 ' 

It is the call of a prophet. The church must begin in earnest to rec- 
ognize the fact that the members of all churches, irrespective of name or 
creed, are included in the brotherhood. "Real unity must be found! first; 
theological and canonical schemes of union will follow. " 

OUR BIBLE. Its Origin, Character and Value. By Herbert L. Willett, 
Ph.D. The University of Chicago. Chicago: The Christian Century 
Press. 278 pages. $1.35 net. 

This is a finely written volume, covering in untechnical phrases a wide 
field of rich thought. It is in harmony with constructive modern scholar- 
ship and whether perused by ministers or laymen it will furnish a valuable 
help in one's understanding of the Bible. 


Titus Street Professor of Ecclesiastical History in Yale University. 
New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. 624 pages. $3.00 net. 

In this notable book Professor Walker has given us a thoroughly accurate 
and comprehensive Church History in one attractive and convenient volume. 
He gives ample presentation of the facts of the history of the Church in 
a graphic and graceful style which makes this a most readable and illumi- 
nating book. The work divides the history of the Church into seven periods. 
I. From the Beginnings to the Gnostic Crisis; II. From the Gnostic 
Crisis to Constantine; III. The Imperial State Church; IV. The Middle 
Ages to the Close of the Investiture Controversy; V. The Later Middle 
Ages; VI. The Reformation; VII. The Transition to the Modern Situa- 
tion. This is a simple, comprehensive outline, logical and sufficient. 

There are two particulars in which this book is especially interesting 
and valuable. The first is the interpretation of the characters and the in- 
fluence of the great leaders of the Church in the different periods of its 
history. Professor Walker has a genius for getting into the life and 
thought of the great men of other days and for bringing out the contribu- 
tion that each has made to the whole. The second is the exposition not 
only of the various movements in the Church, but also of the various politi- 
cal, intellectual, and social movements and institutions of the different 
periods and their relation to and influence on the development of the 
Church and its institutions and doctrines. This makes the work a construc- 
tive history. It deals not only with facts and events, but with meanings 
and values. 

The book is exceedingly timely, coming as it does just at the time 
when the attention of the Christian world is being more and more directed 
toward the re-union of the Church and the re-assessment of its doctrines 
and institutions. In presenting a comprehensive survey of the great out- 
lines and backgrounds of Church History this book renders a valuable serv- 
ice in connection with the crucial problems of the hour. 

Fosdick, Author of "The Meaning of Prayer, " "The Manhood of the 
Master/' etc. New York: George H. Doran Company. 99 pages. 
50 cents. 

This is a strong and fearless analysis, discussed in all too brief pages, 
under six divisions, of themes that are uppermost in the public mind 
to-day. The limitations of force and the reasons for the church accepting 
the challenge by repentance and pursuing a course that shall guide men 
to higher levels are the sections of the book that point the way to better 
social conditions. It is wisely said. 

UTTERANCE AND OTHER POEMS. By Angela Morgan, Author of 
"The Hour Has Struck" and "The Imprisoned Splendor." New 
York. The Baker and Taylor Company. 109 pages. $1.75 net. 

There is a lyric rhapsody in many of these poems that will please all 
lovers of poetry. Miss Morgan is a real artist and this volume is a wit- 
ness to her unfettered power. 


"The greatest need of our generation is that of 
apostles of reconciliation." — JOHN R. MOTZ, 




rHE conference on organic union held at 
the invitation of the General Assembly of 
the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. in Phil- 
adelphia, December 4th-6th, 1918, is considered 
of such importance that this entire number is 
given to its proceedings, including the papers 
presented by the various evangelical communions 
relative to their position on the organic union of 
the church. 

APRIL, 1919 


Seminary House, Baltimore, Md., U. S. A. 


Fleming H. Revell Company, New York 

Christian Board of Publication, St. Louis 

Maruzen Company, Ltd., Tokyo, Osaka, Kyoto, Fukuoka and Sendai 

Oliphants, Ltd., 21 Paternoster Square, London, E. C. 4; 100, Princes Street, Edinburgh 



A Journal in the Interest of Peace in the Divided Church of 
Christ. It is issued in January, April, July and October. 


Vol. VIII. APRIL, 1919 No. 4 






Rev. Wm. H. Roberts, D.D 28 

Rev. Peter Ainslie, D.D. 32 

Rev. William M. Anderson, D.D 36 

Mr. George M. Warner 39 

Bishop C. L. Moench, D.D 40 

Rev. Cornelius Woelfkin, D.D 44 

Prof. Williston Walker, D.D m 45 

Bishop Ethelbert Talbot, D.D 47 

Bishop John W. Hamilton, D.D 51 

Rev. Rufus W. Miller, D.D 57 

Rev. R. E. W t illiams, D.D 6C 

Rev. J. U. Schneider 63 

Rev. George W. Richards, D.D 65 

Rev. William A. Freemantle 71 

Rev. W. F. Funk, D.D 75 

Rev. A. C. Thomas 76 

TIONAL and is the servant of the whole Church, irrespective of name or 
creed. It offers) its pages as a forum to the entire Church of Christ for a 
frank and courteous discussion of those problems that have to do with 
the healing of our unchristian divisions. Its readers are in all Communions. 

SUBSCRIPTION PRICE, $1.00 a year— twenty-five cents a copy. Remit- 
tance should be made by New York draft, express order or money order. 

UNION QUARTERLY, Seminary House, Baltimore, Md., U. S. A. 

Entered as second-class matter in the Post Office at St. Louis, Mo. 


The favorite figure in which the church of the first century set forth its 
conception of the Spirit of Christianity is that of "the Good Shepherd.' ' 
The emblem which appears on this page is a reproduction of one of 
the early Christian gems. 



' ' No one has written more appreciatively respecting this symbol 
than Dean Stanley in his Christian Institutions. It appealed to all his 
warmest sympathies. 'What/ he asks, 'is the test or sign of Christian 
popular belief, which in these earliest representations of Christianity 
is handed down to us as the most cherished, the all-sufficing, token of 
their creed? It is very simple, but it contains a great deal. It is 
a shepherd in the bloom of youth, with the crook, or a shepherd's pipe, 
in one hand, and on his shoulder a lamb, which he carefully carries, and 
holds with the other* hand. We see at once who it is; we all know with- 
out being told. This, in that earliest chamber, or church of a Chris- 
tian family, is the only sign of Christian life and Christian belief. But, 
as it is almost the only sign of Christian belief in this earliest catacomb, 
so it continues always the chief, always the prevailing sign, as long as 
those burial-places were used.' 

"After alluding to the almost total neglect of this lovely symbol 
by the Fathers and Theologians, he says that it answers the question, 
what was the popular religion of the first Christians? 'It was, in one 
word, the religion of the Good Shepherd. The kindness, the courage, 
the love, the beauty, the grace, of the Good Shepherd, was to them, if 
we may so say, Prayer Book and Articles, Creed and Canons, all in one. 
They looked on that figure, and it conveyed to them all they wanted. 
As ages passed on, the Good Shepherd faded from the mind of the 
Christian world, and other emblems of the Christian faith have taken 
His place. Instead of the gracious and gentle Pastor, there came the 
Omnipotent Judge, or the crucified Sufferer or the Infant in His mother's 
arms, or the Master in His parting Supper, or the figures of innumerable 
saints and angels, or the elaborate expositions of the various forms of 
theological controversy.' But 'the Good Shepherd represents to us the 
joyful, cheerful side of Christianity of which we spoke before. . . . 
But that is the primitive conception of the Founder of Christianity in 
those earlier centuries when the first object of the Christian community 
was not to repel, but to include; not to condemn, but to save. The popular 
conception of Christ in the early church was of the strong, the joyous 
youth, of eternal growth, of immortal grace.' " — Frederic W. Farrar in 
The Life of Christ as Represented in Art. 

Organizations for the Promotion of Christian Unity 

Having its inception in the work of Thomas Campbell, 1809, present or- 
ganization 1910, President, Rev. Peter Ainslie; Secretary, Rev. H. C. Arm- 
strong, Seminary House, Baltimore, Md., U. S. A. For intercessory prayer, 
friendly conferences and distribution of irenic literature, ' ' till we all attain 
unto the unity of the faith. n Pentecost Sunday is the day named for 
special prayers for and sermons on Christian unity in all Churches. 

TENDOM, 1857, President, Athelstan Riley, Esq., 2 Kensington Court, 
London; Secretary in the United States, Rev. Calbraith Bourn Perry, Cam- 
bridge, N. Y. For intercessory prayer for the reunion of the Roman Cath- 
olic, Greek and Anglican Communions. 

Rev. Robert W. Weir, Edinburgh. For maintaining, fostering and ex- 
pressing the consciousness of the underlying unity that is shared by many 
members of the different Churches in Scotland. 

CHRISTIAN UNITY FOUNDATION, 1910, President, Rt. Rev. Freder- 
ick Courtney, office, 143 E. 37th St., New York. For the promotion of 
Christian unity throughout the world by research and conference. 

CHURCHMEN'S UNION, 1896, President, Prof. Percy Gardner; Hon. 
Secretary, Rev. C. Moxon, 3 St. George's Square, London S. W., England. 
For cultivation of friendly relations between the Church of England and 
all other Christian bodies. 

DER, 1910, President, Rt. Rev. Charles P. Anderson; Secretary, Robert H. 
Gardiner, Esq., Gardiner, Me., U. S. A. For a world conference of all 
Christians relative to the unity of Christendom. 

1908, President, Rev. Frank Mason North; Secretary, Rev. Charles S. Mac- 
farland, 105 E. 22d St., New York. For the cooperation of the various 
Protestant Communions in service rather than an attempt to unite upon 
definitions of theology and polity. 

OF ENGLAND, 1895, President, Rev. Principal W. B. Selbie, Mansfield 
College, Oxford; Secretary, Rev. F. B. Meyer, Memorial Hall, E. C, Lon- 
don. For facilitating fraternal intercourse and cooperation among the 
Evangelical Free Churches in England. . 

FREE CHURCH FELLOWSHIP, 1911, Rev. Malcolm Spencer, Colue 
Bridge House, Rickmansworth, London, N. For the cultivation of cor- 
porate prayer and thought for a new spiritual fellowship and communion 
with all branches of the Christian Church. 


A World Conference on Faith and Order, time and place not 
yet named. 

At the instance of the Association for the Promotion of 
Christian Unity, Pentecost Sunday has been named primarily as 
the day for special sermons on Christian unity in all Churches, 
along with prayers to that end. 

A conference on the organic union of the evangelical commun- 
ions of America will be held at a place and time to be desig- 
nated later, perhaps in November or December of 1919. For 
particulars write Rev. W. H. Roberts, D.D., Witherspoon Build- 
ing, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Bibliography of Christian Unity 

THE BOOKS included in this list are -by Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Roman 
Catholics, Congregationalists, Unitarians, Lutherans, Baptists, Disciples of Christ, etc. 

CHRISTIAN UNION, Van Dyke, Appleton, 1885 $1.00 

CHRISTIAN UNION, Garrison, St. Louis, Christian Board of Publication, 

1906 , 100 

CHRISTIAN UNION IN EFFORT, Firth, Philadelphia, Lippincott, 1911.. 1.50 

Co., 1913 2/6 

CHRISTIAN UNITY, Briggs, Scribner, 1900 1.00 

CHRISTIAN UNITY AT WORK, Macfarland, Federal Council 1.00 



Young, Chicago, The Christian Century Co., 1904 1.00 

HOW TO PROMOTE CHRISTIAN UNION, Kershner, Cincinnati, The 

Standard Publishing Co., 1916 1.00 

LECTURES ON THE REUNION OF THE CHURCH, Dollinger, Dodd, 1872 1.50 

land. 5 Vols 5.00 


Christian Century Co , , 50 


Scribner, 1908 1.00 


RELIGIOUS SYSTEMS OF THE WORLD, London, Swan Sonnenschein & 

Co., 1908 

RESTATEMENT AND REUNION, Streeter, Macmillan, 1914 75 


1895 1.25 

DOM, Tarner, London, Elliott Stock, 1895 

THAT THEY ALL MAY BE ONE, Wells, Funk & Wagnalls Co., 1905 75 

THAT THEY ALL MAY BE ONE, Whyte, Armstrong, 1907 25 

THE CHRISTIAN SYSTEM, Campbell, St. Louis, Christian Board of Pub- 
lication, 1890 1.00 

THE CHURCH AND RELIGIOUS UNITY, Kelly, Longmans, 1913 1.50 

THE CHURCHES OF THE FEDERAL COUNCIL, Macfarland, Revell.... 1.00 

THE LARGER CHURCH, Lanier, Fredericksburg, Va 1.25 

THE LEVEL PLAN FOR CHURCH UNION, Brown, Whittaker, 1910 1.50 

THE MEANING OF CHRISTIAN UNITY, Cobb, Crowell, 1915 1.25 


CHURCH, Ainslie, Revell, 1913 1.00 

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF RELLGIOUS SECTS, McComas, Revell, 1912.... 1.25 

mans, 1911 .75 

delphia. American Sunday-School Union, 1915 , 75 


1895 , 2.50 


Harnack, Macmillan, 1899 1.00 

UNITY AND MISSIONS, Brown, Revell, 1915 1.50 

WHAT MUST THE CHURCH DO TO BE SAVED? Simms, Revell, 1913.. 1.50 



"Though the vision tarry, wait for it" . . . that vision 
which, as we cannot but believe, rose before the author of the 
Fourth Gospel: a vision which points, in its fullest realization, 
to the highest fellowship of individuals and peoples linked 
heart to heart and hand to hand because one and all "bound 
by gold chains about the feet of God. " Yet there must be 
no passive waiting for the vision; it behooves us to work for 
it. And we shall so work to better purpose, when, steeping 
ourselves in the great thoughts which stirred in the mind and 
soul of our Evangelist, we aim at translating them into action 
with an eye to every circumstance and exigency which con- 
fronts us in our modern world. — H. Latimer Jackson in The 
Problem of the Fourth Gospel, p. 141. 


There are drawings together, there are movements for unity 
in the various churches, there are longings for reunion between 
church and church, there are germs out of which a League of 
Nations may well be developed: if all these are to come to 
fruition, it is for Christians once more and far more efficiently 
to make the portrait of "the many-featured unity," to say 
to all mankind: 

"A Man like to me 
Thou shalt love and be loved by forever: a Hand like this hand 
Shall throw open the gates of new life to thee. See the Christ stand!" 
— Walter Lock in The Constructive Quarterly. 


Almighty God, who art able to do such things as pass man's 
understanding, give us an heart earnestly to believe that thou 
art able and willing to do all those things for the good of 
thy Church which, of ourselves, we are unable to perform. 
Cast out from our hearts, we beseech thee, the spirit of unbe- 
lief : and help us so to humble ourselves before thee and to 
open our hearts and minds to the teaching of thy Spirit and 
the leading of thy will that those things may be accomplished 
which shall unite in one Body thy faithful people; through 
Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. 


Wn?H the advent of peace, the visible unity of Christians in the one Lord 
of peace and righteousness and love is an absolute necessity, if the new 
order of the world for which we hope is to be permanent and effective. The 
problems of reconstruction are the greatest ever presented to humanity. 
It is now no question of reestablishing a balance of power which, though 
it might make war impossible for a time in an exhausted world, would 
leave the nations armed to the teeth, with hearts full of jealousy and sus- 
picion. The problem now is to create a Brotherhood of the World. The 
splendid lessons of duty, service, sacrifice, which privileged and unprivi- 
leged alike have learned through all the horrors of this titanic struggle, 
must be conserved. Rich and poor, the weak and the strong, must under- 
stand that no man can reach his highest development so long as he lives 
only to himself. 

Nations and individuals must hear the message that God is Love, re- 
vealed in His Son, Incarnate in Jesus born of the Virgin Mary, and that 
the supreme law of the world is Christ's New Commandment that we 
should love one another even as also He has loved us. The Church was 
established that it might proclaim that message and establish that law, — 
the message of love, infinite and eternal, the law of the only life that is 
worth living. But love is unity, the sharing in the one Life of God. A 
divided Church cannot fully manifest that Life, nor adequately proclaim 
that Love. 

The World Conference on Faith and Order is an attempt to bring 
Christians together in true Christian love and humility to try to under- 
stand and appreciate one another, and so to prepare the way for con- 
structive effort for that visible unity which is necessary to convince and 
convert the world to its Redeemer. Already many partial and local ef- 
forts are being made toward reunion. It cannot be doubted that God the 
Holy Spirit is inspiring and guiding them. But the world is no longer 
merely an aggregation of nations. It is one, as it never has been before, 
and as it never will be again for generations, unless it be placed on the 
foundation of which Jesus Christ is the corner stone. Christians need the 
vision of a whole world at peace because it is at one in the peace of God 
which passeth understanding. God has blessed the efforts to bring about 
the World Conference to a degree which seemed impossible eight years ago. 
Almost every Communion which could be reached has promised its co- 
operation, and the Commission of the Protestant Episcopal Church is 
preparing to send as soon as possible deputations to present the invitation 
to join in the Conference to the Churches of Rome and of the East and to 
those in other countries to which access has not yet been possible. 

But if progress is to be made toward the visible reunion of Christians 
it can come only from the deep desire of the whole Church, and that de- 
sire can find its only effective manifestation, its only means of achievement, 
through incessant and fervent prayer. Urge your friends and acquaint- 
ances of your own and other Communions to prayer for the turning of the 
hearts of Christians to unity and for the guidance of the World Confer- 
ence. Form prayer circles in private houses and ask your minister to hold 
public services. 

By order of the Commission of the Protestant Episcopal Church on 
the World Conference. 

Charles P. Anderson, President, 
William T. Manning, Chairman of Execu- 
tive Committee, 
Robert H. Gardiner, Secretary. 
Gardiner, Me, 


How thankful we should be that all over Christendom 
people have got siek of sectarianism, and (too lightly, 
no doubt, in many cases) bid us make haste and come 
together! For it cannot be lightly done. " Union is 
not to be obtained, " said one of our ablest ministers 
recently taken from us, "by toning down conviction, or 
searching for ambiguous phrases. " Peace must come 
through the truth — the truth as it is in Jesus, stated, 
apprehended, grasped with intense realization of the 
duties it imposes. "When Christians differ," said S. 
Ambrose, "they should not contend: they should con- 
fer. " — James Cooper in the Closing Address as Moder- 
ator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scot- 
land, 1917. 

As a venture, while everything else is advancing in price, THE 
CHRISTIAN UNION QUARTERLY is reduced from two dollars 
to one dollar a year, beginning with the January number. It is 
hoped that every subscriber will seek to secure another reader. 


Vol. VIII. APRIL, 1919 No. 4 







IN THE U. S. A. 

December 4th to 6th, 19 18 

The Conference on Organic Union, held at the invitation 
of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in 
the U. S. A., convened in Witherspoon Hall, Wither- 
spoon Building, Philadelphia, Pa., December 4th, 1918, 
at 2 p. m., and was called to order by the Chairman, Eev. 
William Henry Eoberts, D.D. 

Devotional exercises were conducted by the Chair- 
man. Prayers were offered by Drs. Wm. H. Eoberts, 
Frank C. Parkin, H. C. Herring and Wm. P. Merrill. 
The Chairman announced that the representatives pres- 
ent, as a rule, were members of Committees or Commis- 


sions on Church Union or Unity of their respective de- 

The roll was called by Dr. H. C. Herring and repre- 
sentatives responded from nineteen communions as fol- 

Northern Baptist Convention 
Rev. Cornelius Woelfkin, D.D., Fifth Ave. Baptist Church, New York 

tRev. A. T. Fowler, D.D., East Orange, N. J. 
Rev. E. A. Hanley, D.D., 94 Berkeley St., Rochester, N. Y. 
Rev. H. F. Stilwell, D.D., 2387 Woodmere Drive, Cleveland, Ohio. 
Rev. Carter Helm Jones, D.D., First Baptist Church, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Congregational Churches 
tRev. Raymond Calkins, D.D., 19 Berkeley St., Cambridge Mass., Chair- 
Rev. C. E. Burton, D.D., 237 Fourth Ave., New York, N. Y. 
Rev. Charles F. Carter, D.D., Hartford, Conn. 
Rev. W. H. Day, D.D., Bridgeport, Conn. 
Rev. John Gardner, D.D., 1317 Chicago Ave., Chicago, 111. 
Rev. H. C. Herring, D.D., 14 Beacon St., Boston, Mass. 
Rev. C. S. Mills, D.D., Montclair, N. J. 

Rev. Charles S. MacFarland, D.D., 105 E. 22d St., New York. 
Mr. W. W. Mills, Marietta, Ohio. 
President C. S. Nash, D.D., Berkeley, Cal. 
Rev. A. P. Pratt, D.D., Greenfield, Mass. 

Rev. Newman Smyth, D.D., 51 Trumbull St., New Haven, Conn. 
Rev. J. R. Voris, Berkeley, Calif. 

Rev. E. S. Rottorock, D.D., Schofield Building, Cleveland, Ohio. 
Prof. Williston Walker, Ph.D., 281 Edwards St., New Haven, Conn. 
Dr. Lucien C. Warner, LL.D., 52 Vanderbilt Ave., New York, N. Y. 
Mrs. Charles S. Nash, Berkeley, Calif. 
Mrs. Charles E. Burton, Forest Hill, N. Y. 
Mrs. William W. Mills, Marietta, Ohio. 

Disciples of Christ 
"Rev. Peter Ainslie, D.D., Seminary House, Baltimore, Md., Chairman. 
Rev. Edgar DeWitt Jones, D.D., Bloomington, 111. 
Rev. F. W. Burnham, LL.D., Carew Building, Cincinnati, Ohio. 
Rev. Finis S. Idleman, D.D., 142 W. 81st St., New York City. 
Rev. Irving S. Chenoweth, N. E. Boulevard and 10th Sts., Phila., Pa. 
Rev. E. B. Bagby, 1658 Park Road, Washington, D. C. 
Rev. George A. Miller, 336 10th St., N. E., Washington, D. C. 
Rev. Earl Wilfley, LL.D., 1483 Harvard St., N. W., Washington, D. C. 

f Absent. 


Mr. E. M. Bowman, No. 1 W. 67th St., New York City. 
Dr. E. E. Montgomery, 1226 Spruce St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
Rev. T. E. Winter, 648 N. 40th St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
Rev. H. C. Armstrong, Seminary House, Baltimore, Md. 
tRev. B. A. Abbott, Editor Christian Evangelist, St. Louis, Mo. 
Rev. B. H. Melton, 316 Suffolk St., Baltimore, Md. 
Rev. F. D. Kershner, LL.D., Standard Publishing Co., Cincinnati, Ohio. 

Christian Union of the United States 

Rev. A. C. Thomas, Milo, Iowa. 

Evangelical Synod of North America 

Rev. John F. Baltzer, D.D., 6328 Emma Ave., St. Louis, Mo., Chairman. 
tRev. C. C. Haig, 1013 7th St., Port Huron, Mich. 
Rev. D. Irwin, D.D., Elmhurst, 111. 

Rev. J. U. Schneider, 116 Lower 6th St., Evansville, Ind. 
Rev. Paul A. Menzel, D.D., 1920 G St., N. W. Washington, D. C. 

Society of Friends 


Mr. John B. Garrett, Rosemont, Pa. 

Mr. J. Henry Bartlett, 207 Walnut Place, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Mr. Alfred C. Garrett, York and Fisher's Sts., German town, Pa. 

Mr. Stanley R. Yarnall, Coulter St., Germantown, Pa. 

Mr. Henry Tatnall Brown, Moorestown, N. J. 
fProf. Rufus M. Jones, Haverford, Pa. 

Dr. Edward G. Rhoads, Caulker St., Germantown, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Mr. Walter W. Haviland, 140 N. 16th St., Philadelphia, Pa. 

Mr. George L. Jones, Westtown, Pa. 

Mr. Walter T. Moore, The Bourse, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Mr. George M. Warner, The Bourse, Philadelphia, Pa. 
tMr. Henry W. Leeds, Atlantic City, N. J. 
tMr. J. Harvey Borton, Moorestown, N. J. 

United Lutheran Church 


Rev. H. A. Weller, D.D., Penn Square Building, Philadelphia, Pa. 
Rev. Charles Jacobs, D.D., 7333 Germantown Ave., Philadelphia, Pa. 
Rev. Edwin Heyl Delk, D.D., 630 N. Broad St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
Mr. E. Clarence Miller, 314 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
Mr. Harvey C. Miller, 3214 N. Broad St., Philadelphia, Pa. 

Methodist Episcopal Church 

Bishop John W. Hamilton, Washington, D. C. 
Bishop Joseph F. Berry, Philadelphia, Pa. 
Bishop Luther B. Wilson, New York, N. Y. 


t Bishop R. J. Cooke, Helena, Montana. 

Dr. David G. Downey, 150 Fifth Ave., New York. 

Dr. G. P. Eckman, Seranton, Pa. 

tRev. F. Mason North, D.D., 150 Fifth Ave., New York. 
fRev. James R. Joy, D.D., 150 Fifth Ave., New York. 

Rev. Frank P. Parkin, D.D., 5346 Wayne Ave., Germantown, Phila- 
delphia, Pa. 

Rev. Edward S. Ninde, D.D., 257 High St., Germantown, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Rev. Robert Bagnell, D.D., 216 State St., Harrisburg, Pa. 

Rev. G. O. Peck, D.D., Baltimore, Md. 

fRev. John F. Goucher, D.D., Goucher College, Baltimore Md. 
fRev. W. A. Shanklin, D.D., Wesleyan University, Middletown, Conn. 

Rev. Frank B. Lynch, D.D., 340 N. 52d St., Philadelphia, Pa. 

Rev. Virgil E. Rorer, D.D., 154 N. 21st St., Philadelphia, Pa. 

Moravian Church in America 

Bishop O. L. Moench, D.D., 44 Church St., Bethlehem, Pa. 
tRev. Paul de Schweinitz, D.D., 20 Church St., Bethlehem, Pa. 
Rev. John S. Romig, D.D., 1411 N. 17th St., Philadelphia, Pa. 

Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. 

Rev. Wm. H. Roberts, D.D., Witherspoon Bldg., Phila., Pa., Chairman. 

Rev. Reuben H. Hartley, D.D., 1260 Maine St., Quincy, 111. 

Rev. James H. Snowden, D.D., Western Theo. Seminary, Pittsburgh, Pa. 

Rev. Wm. McKibbin, D.D., Walnut Hills, Cincinnati, Ohio. 

Rev. Chas. R. Erdman, D.D., Princeton, N. J. 
tRev. Edgar P. Hill, D.D., 16 Chalmers Place, Chicago, 111. 
tRev. Robt. Mackenzie, D.D., 156 Fifth Ave., New York. 

Rev. Wm. H. Black, D.D., Marshall, Mo. 

Rev. Edgar A. Elmore, D.D., Chattanooga, Tenn. 
tRev. J. Ross Stevenson, D.D., Princeton, N. J. 

Rev. Geo. Reynolds, D.D., 33 Pintard Ave., New Rochelle, N. Y. 

Rev. Chas. Little, D.D., Wabash, Ind. 
tRev. John F. Carson, D.D., 258 Jefferson Ave., Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Rev. Wm. P. Merrill, D.D., 112 E. 36th St., New York. 

Rev. John A. Marquis, D.D., 156 Fifth Ave., New York. 

Rev. J. Wilbur Chapman, D.D., Box 326, Jamaica, N. Y. 

Rev. H. G. Mendenhall, D.D., 311 W. 75th St., New York. 

Rev. Wm. J. Darby, D.D., Evansville, Ind. 

Rev. Jos. A. Vance, D.D., 21 Edmund Place, Detroit, Mich. 

Rev. Geo. E. Hunt, D.D., Madison, Wis. 

Rev. J. Frank Smith, D.D., City Temple, Dallas, Texas. 
tGen. Geo. H. Shields, 818 Rialto Building, St. Louis, Mo. 
t Judge John A. McIlvaine, Washington, Pa. 

Henry W. Jessup, Esq., 55 Liberty St., New York. 
tHon s E. E. Beard, Lebanon, Tenn. 

Robt. S. Fulton, Esq., 651 First National Bank Building, Cincinnati, O. 


tProf. J. J. MoConnell, Cedar Rapids, Iowa. 
tMr. A. R. Nicol, Summit, N. J. 

Protestant Episcopal Church in the U. S. 

Rt. Rev. Ethelbert Talbot, D.D., South Bethlehem, Pa., Chairman. 

Rt. Rev. Thos. F. Gailor, D.D., 692 Poplar Ave., Memphis, Tenn. 
tRt. Rev. Sidney C. Partridge, D.D., 14 W. Armour Blvd., Kansas City, Mo. 
fRt. Rev. Cameron Mann, D.D., Orlando, Fla. 
tRt. Rev. C. P. Anderson, D.D., 1612 Prairie Ave., Chicago, 111. 

Rt. Rev. Philip M. Rhinelander, D.D., Philadelphia, Pa. 
tRt. Rev. Chas. H. Brent, D.D., Morgan, Harjes & Co., Paris, France. 

Rt. Rev. E. S. Lines, D.D., Newark, N. J. 

Rt. Rev. Paul Matthews, D.D., Princeton, N. J. 
tRev. James S. Stone, D.D., 664 Rust St., Chicago, 111. 
tRev. S, D. McConnell, D.D., Easton, Md. 

Rev. G. Woolsey Hodge, D.D., 334 S. 13th St., Philadelphia, Pa. 

Rev. L. C. Washburn, D.D., 317 S. 11th St., Philadelphia, Pa. 

Rev. S. U. Mitman, Ph.D., South Bethlehem, Pa. 

Rev. George L. Richardson, D.D., 3914 Locust St., Philadelphia, Pa. 

Rev. John Mockridge, D.D., 2052 Locust St., Philadelphia, Pa. 

Rev. James P. Ware, Drif ton, Pa. 

Rev. J. W. Ashton, D.D., Olean, N. Y. 

Rev. Robert P. Kreitler, D.D., Scranton, Pa. 

Mr. Geo. W. Pepper, Land Title Building, Philadelphia, Pa. 
tMr. F. C. Moorhouse, Milwaukee, Wis. 
fHon. L. Bradford Prince, LL.D., Santa Fe, N. M. 

Mr. Reynolds D. Brown, Land Title Building, Philadelphia, Pa, 

Mr. Edward H. Bonsall, Land Title and Trust Co., Philadelphia, Pa. 

Reformed Church in America 

Rev. Thomas H. Mackenzie, D.D., 37 So. Parsons Ave., Flushing, N. Y. 

Reformed Church in the U. S. 

Rev. Geo. W. Richards, D.D., Lancaster, Pa., Chairman. 

Rev. Rufus W. Miller, D.D., 15th and Race Sts., Philadelphia, Pa. 

Rev. J. Spangler Kieffer, D.D., Hagerstown, Md. 

tProf. A. E. Dahlman, D.D., Sheboygan, Wis. 

fPres. Chas. E. Miller, D.D., Heidelberg University, Tiffin, Ohio. 

tMr. Albert Ankeney, Xenia, Ohio. 

Mr. E. A. Rice, York, Pa. 

Reformed Episcopal Church 
Bishop Robert L. Rudolph, D.D., 103 S. 36th, St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
Rev. Robert Westly Peach, D.D., 271 Parker St., Newark, N. J. 
Rev. Wm. Tracy, D.D., 4400 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
Rev. Wm. A. Freemantle, D.D., 1617 Oxford St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
Rev. Joseph D. Wilson, D.D., 4401 Sansom St., Philadelphia, Pa. 


, United Brethren 

t Bishop G. M Matthews, D.D., Dayton, Ohio. 

Bishop W. M. Bell, D.D., Washington, D. C. 

Bishop H. H. Fout, D.D., Indianapolis, Ind. 

Bishop C. J. Kephart, D.D., Kansas City, Mo. 

Bishop W. H. Washinger, D.D., Portland, Oregon. 

Bishop A. T. Howard, Dayton, Ohio. 

Rev. W. R. Funk, D.D., Dayton, Ohio. 
tRev. J. M. Philippi, D.D., Dayton, Ohio. 

Pres. U. G. Clippenger, D.D., Westville, Ohio. 

Rev. T. D. Crites, D.D., Toledo, Ohio. 

Rev. J. Walter Lutz, D.D., Chambersburg, Pa. 

Rev. H. E. Miller, D.D.,, Lebanon, Pa. 
fMr. E. L. Shirey, Dayton, Ohio. 

United Presbyterian Church of N. A. 

Rev. W. M. Anderson, D.D., 1514 Master St., Philadelphia, Pa,, Chairman. 

Rev. C. S. Cleland, D.D., 802 N. 17th St., Philadelphia, Pa. 

Rev. J. C. Scott, D.D., Cambridge, N. Y., 

Rev. James Parker, Ph.D., 331 Webster Ave., Jersey City, N. J. 

Mr. John A. Stewart, 1118 Filmocre St., Frankford, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Welsh Presbyterian Church 

Rev. Robert R. Davies, S. Meade St., Wilkes-Barre, Pa. 
Rev. R. E. Williams, 56 N. 53d St., Philadelphia, Pa. 

A Docket was presented which was approved and is as 
follows : 


Wednesday, December 4, 1918, First Session. 
In Witherspoon Hall. 

p.m. To preside, Rev. William H. Roberts, D.D. 

2:00 Devotional Services. 

2:30 Calling of the Roll. 

2:40 Report of Committee on Programme, Order of Business and Other 
Matters connected with the Conference, and action thereupon. 

3:00 Address by the Rev. Wm. H. Roberts, D.D., Chairman of the Com- 
mittee of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. 

3:20 Presentation of Plans, Resolutions, etc., for reference to Committee 
on Business, or other Committees. 

3:30 Presentation of Views on the Subject of Organic Union of the 
different Churches. 

3:30 The Church of the Disciples, by the Rev. Peter Ainslie, D.D. 

3:45 The United Presbyterian Church, by the Rev. W. M. Anderson, D. D. 

4:00 The Society of Friends, by Mr. George M. Warner. 


4:15 The Moravian Church in America, by Bishop C. L. Moench. 
4:30 The Baptist Churches, by the Rev. Carter Helm Jones, D.D. 
4:45 Announcement of Appointments, notices, etc. 
5:00 Adjournment with prayer until 8 p.m. 

Wednesday, December 4, Evening Session. 
In Calvary Presbyterian Church. 

P.M. To preside, Bishop Joseph F. Berry, D.D. 

8:00 Devotional Services. 

8:10 Addresses— The Rt. Rev. Thomas F. Gailor, D.D., Chairman of the 

House of Bishops of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the U. S. 

The Rev. C. E. Burton, D. D., General Secretary of Home Missions of 

the Congregational Churches. 
The Rev. J. Frank Smith, D.D., Moderator of the General Assembly 

of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. 
Necessary business, and adjournment with Benediction. 

Thursday, December 5, Morning Session. 
In Witherspoon Hall. 

a.m. * To preside, Bishop Philip M. Rhinelander, D.D. 

9:30 Devotional Services. 

9:45 Minutes of yesterday's Sessions and transaction of business. 
10:00 Continuance of the Presentation of the views of the different 

10:00 The Congregational Churches, Prof. Williston Walker. 

10:15 The Protestant Episcopal Church in the U. S., Rt. Rev. Ethelbert 
Talbot, D.D., Chairman of the Commission on Christian Unity. 

10:30 The Methodist Episcopal Church, Bishop John W. Hamilton, D.D. 

10:45 The Reformed Church in the U./S., Rev. Rufus W. Miller, D.D. 

11:00 The Synod of the Evangelical Church of North America, Rev. John 
F. Baltzer, D.D. 

11:15 The United Lutheran Church in America, Rev. H. A. Weller, D.D. 

11:30 The Welsh Presbyterians, Rev. R. E. Willialms. 

11:45 Address by Rev. Geo. W. Richards, D. D., on The Historical Sig- 
nificance of Denominationalism. 

12:15 Recess for luncheon with prayer. 

Thursday, December 5, Afternoon Session. 

In Witherspoon Hall. 

p.m. To preside, Rev. Edgar DeWitt Jones, D.D. 

2:30 Devotional Services. 

2 :45 Continuance of presentation of the views of the churches. 

2:45 The Christian Union of the U. S., Rev. A. C. Thomas. 

3:00 The Reformed Episcopal Church, Rev. A. A. Freemantle, D.D. 

3:15 The United Brethren, Rev. W. R. Funk, D.D. 

3:30 Reports of Committees and General Discussion. 

5:00 Recess until 6:30 p.m. with prayer. 


Thursday, December 5, Evening Session. 

6:30 Dinner to the Conference at the Bellevue Stratford Hotel. 
8:00 Addresses by Clergy and Laity. 

Necessary business and adjournment with Benediction. 

Et. Eev. Thomas J, Garland, on behalf of the Local 
Committee of Arrangements, made an address of wel- 

Dr. Wm. H. Roberts presented the report on behalf 
of the Committee of Arrangements which was approved 
and is as follows : 

The Preliminary Committee of Arrangements for this Conference, 
presents to you its report: 

I. The Committee states first that it is composed of the chairmen or 
representatives of the different committees or commissions on the sub- 
jects of Christian Union or Christian Unity, which had been appointed 
by most of the Churches invited to be present at the Conference. Of 
these gentlemen the following met in Philadelphia, Pa., on November 
22nd, 1918: Rev. H. C. Herring, D.D., for the Congregational Churches; 
Rev. Peter Ainslie, D.D., for the Disciples of Christ; Rev. Edwin Heyl 
Delk, D.D., for the United Lutheran Church in America; Bishop Joseph 
F. Berry, D.D., for the Methodist Episcopal Church; Rev. Paul de 
Schweinitz, D.D., for the Moravian Church; Rev. Wm. H. Roberts, D.D., 
for the Presbyterian Church in the U. S>. A.; Rt. Rev. Ethelbert Talbot, 
D.D., for the Protestant Episcopal Church in the U.'S.; and Rev. George 
W. Richards, D.D., and Rev. Rufus W. Miller, D.D., for the Reformed 
Church in the U. S. The Committee chose Rev. Wm. H. Roberts, D.D., 
for its Chairman, and Rev. Rufus W. Miller, D. D., as Secretary. 

II. The Committee carefully considered the general situation as to 
the Conference and approved of the following matters: 

1. The appointment of a Local. Committee of Arrangements. 

2. The program for the Conference. 

3. The printing of the pamphlet containing the list of representatives, 
the program, and the names of the Local Committee of Arrangements. 

4. The appointment of the Chairman of the Committee of the Pres- 
byterian Church in the U. S. A. to preside at the first session of the Con- 
ference, and of the other brethren named on the program to preside as 
indicated thereon. 

5. The appointment of Rev. H. C. Herring, D.D., Rev. Rufus W. Mil- 
ler, D.D., and Rev. Wm. P. Fulton, D.D., to serve as secretaries for the 

6. The appointment of a Business Committee by the Chairman of 
the first session of the Conference, to consist of one member from each 
Church represented, this Chairman to be himself one of the members. 


7. The appointment of a Committee on Resolutions and Findings to 
be nominated by the Business Committee. 

8. The sessions of the Conference to b'e open to the public. 

9. The Members of the Local Committee of Arrangements to be re- 
ceived as Corresponding Members. 

10. The voting upon all matters shall be by members individually, 
but if the request be made by any two members, then the vote shall be 
by denominational units. 

11. The Local Committee of Arrangements to be requested to have the 
report of the proceedings of the Conference sent to all the denominational 

III. The Committee submits the following recommendations as to the 
scope of the business of the Conference. Attention is here drawn to the 
fact that the body which the Presbyterian General Assembly desired 
to meet was a council with regularly appointed delegates named by the 
respective denominational authorities but circumstances prevented the 
gathering of such a council prior to Janury 1st, 1919, the date named by 
said Assembly. In the situation the Committee of the Presbyterian As- 
sembly took the following action: 

WHEREAS, some of the bodies to be invited to this Interdenomi- 
national Council not having yet met since the meeting of our Assembly, and 
no representation of such bodies being practicable except through existing 
committees or commissions; 

RESOLVED, that the Conference in December already agreed upon 
be in the nature of a conference preliminary to the Interdenominational 
Council planned by the General Assembly and that the date of holding 
such Council be left to such preliminary conference to determine. 

In view of this action, which was approved by all parties interested, 
the recommendations as to the scope of the business are as follows: 

1. That the views of each Church represented in the Conference, as 
to the proposal for Organic Union, be submitted as indicated in the pro- 
gram, that the statements presented be in writing, be submitted to the 
Committee on Business, and be printed in the proceedings of the Con- 

2. That all Resolutions and plans dealing with Union, offered by 
members or Committees, be referred to the Business Committee without 
reading, unless the Conference shall vote otherwise. 

3. That at the afternoon session on Thursday, December 5th, the re- 
port of the Business Committee shall be submitted, and that the discus* 
sion proceed upon the main question, the desirability and practicability 
of Organic Union between the Evangelical Churches of the U. S. 

If Union be regarded as practicable, then the Business Committee 
should report a date and place for the Interdenominational Council, and 
the Committee on Resolutions should present for consideration such rec- 
ommendations as to it may appear proper. 

IV. It is requested that each body of representatives in the Con- 



ference be requested to report to the proper authorities in the respective 
Churches. In behalf of the Committee, 

WM. H. ROBERTS, Chairman. 

On motion a Business Committee was constituted, 
consisting of two representatives from each denomina- 
tion. The Business Committee named is as follows: 

Rev. Cornelius Woelfkin, D.D. 
Rev. H. C. Herring, D.D. 
Rev. Peter Ainslie, D.D. 
Rev. John F. Baltzer, D.D. 
Mr. George M. Warner. 
Rev. Edwin Heyl Delk, D.D. 
Bishop Joseph F. Berry, D.D. 
Bishop C. L. Moench, D.D. 
Rev. W. H. Roberts, D.D. 

Rt. Rev. Ethelbert Talbot, D.D. 
Rev. Thomas H. Mac Kenzie, D.D. 
Rev. George W. Richards, D.D. 
Rev. F. W. Burnham, LL.D. 
Bishop G. M. Mathews, D.D. 
Rev. W. M. Anderson, D.D. 
Rev. Robert R. Davies. 
Rev. A. C. Thomas. 
Bishop Robert L. Rudolph. 

A Committee on Resolutions and Findings was ap- 
pointed as follows : 

Rev. E. A. Hanley, D.D. 
Prof. Williston Walker, Ph.D. 
Rev. Irving S. Chenoweth. 
Rev. J. U. Schneider. 
Mr. J. Henry Bartlett. 
Rev. H. A. Weller. 
Rev. David G. Downey, D.D. 
Rev. John S. Romig, D.D. 

Rev. Wm. H. Black, D.D. 
Rev. C. L. Washburn, D.D. 
Rev. Rufus W. Miller, D.D. 
Bishop H. H. Fout, D.D. 
Mr. John A. Stewart. 
Rev. R. E. Williams. 
Rev. Robert W. Peach, D.D. 

Rev. Dr. Wm. H Roberts, Chairman of the Commit- 
tee on Church Cooperation and Union of the Presby- 
terian Church in the U. S. A., submitted a Statement on 
Organic Union, and the Attitude and Purpose of the 
Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. in the matter of the 
call for an Interdenominational Conference of Evan- 
gelical Churches to consider the question of their organic 

The representatives of the several denominations 
were then called to present their views on the subject of 
Organic Union as follows : 

The Disciples of Christ by Rev. Peter Ainslie, D.D. 

The United Presbyterian Church by Rev. W. M. An- 
derson, D.D. 


The Society of Friends by Mr. George M. Warner and 
Mr. Alfred C. Garrett. 

The Moravian Church in America by Bishop C. L. 

The Baptist Churches by Rev. Cornelius Wo elf kin, 

The Conference took recess until 8 p.m., after prayer 
by Rev. Alex. Alexopolis, of the Greek Orthodox Church. 

Wednesday Evening, December 4th, 1918 

The evening session of the Conference was held in 
the Calvary Presbyterian Church, Locust street west of 
Fifteenth street, at 8 o'clock, Bishop Joseph F. Berry, 
D.D., presiding. The Scriptures were read by the pas- 
tor of the church, Rev. Wm. Muir Auld, and prayer was 
offered by Rev. Robert Hunter, D.D. Addresses were 
delivered by the Rt. Rev. Thomas F. Gailor, D.D., 
Chairman of the House of Bishops of the Protestant 
Episcopal Church in the U. S., the Rev. C. E. Burton, 
D.D., General Secretary of Home Missions of the Con- 
gregational Churches, the Rev. J. Frank Smith, D.D., 
Moderator of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian 
Church in the U. S. A., the Rev. Alexander Alexopolis of 
the Greek Orthodox Church, New York. The Benedic- 
tion was pronounced by the presiding officer, Bishop 


Thursday, December 5th, 9:30 a.m. 

The Conference resumed its sessions in Wither- 
spoon Hall, December 5th, 1918, at 9 :30 a.m., Bishop 
Philip M. Bhinelander, D.D., LL.D., presiding. Devo- 
tional exercises were conducted by the presiding officer, 
Bishop Ehinelander, who also expressed his gratification 
at the holding of this Conference. 

The Minutes were read and approved. 

The roll was completed. 


A partial report from the Business Committee was 
presented by the Chairman, Dr. Wm. H. Eoberts. It 
was voted to seat the delegate from the Minneapolis 
Church Federation, Eev. Morton C. Pearson, as Corre- 
sponding Delegate. On recommendation of the Busi- 
ness Committee it was voted to decline the application 
from the representative of the New Jerusalem Church. 

Permission was granted the Committee on Business 
and Eesolutions to retire from the Conference at 11 a.m. 

Bishop Paul Matthews, D.D. took the place of Bishop 
Ehinelander as presiding officer for a brief period. 

The Conference continued the hearing of representa- 
tives as to their views on Church Union. 

The Congregational Churches by Prof. Williston 

The Protestant Episcopal Church in the United 
States by Et. Eev. Ethelbert Talbot, D.D. 

The Methodist Episcopal Church by Bishop John 
W. Hamilton. 

The Eeformed Church in the U. S. by Eev. Eufus W. 
Miller, D.D. 

Dr. Wm. H. Eoberts read a communication from the 
Executive Committee of the United Lutheran Church 
in America and the greetings from said Church were 
extended by Eev. H. A. Weller, D.D. 

The Welsh Presbyterian Church by Eev. E. E. 

The Evangelical Synod of North America by Eev. 
J. U. Schneider. 

Eev. George W. Eichards, D.D., presented a paper 
on "The Historical Significance of Denominationalism. ,, 

The Committee on Business, Eesolutions and Find- 
ings reported, and the Eeport was adopted as follows: 

The Joint Committees reeommend the seating as a corresponding 
member of Major Wilson as a representative of the Drexel-Biddle Bible 

It is also recommended that the following resolutions be adopted: 


RESOLVED, That this Conference appreciates the work done by the 
Committee on Faith and Order of the Protestant Episcopal Churches, 
in the United States, Great Britain and elsewhere, with a view to a world 
conference of Christian Churches. 

RESOLVED, That having in view the condition of the Christian 
people in the East, Greeks, Armenians, Syrians and others, we hereby 
express our cordial sympathy for them in their sufferings and pray for 
their ultimate liberation from the dominion of the oppressive Turkish 

RESOLVED, That the question of publishing the proceedings of the 
Conference be referred to the officers of the same, with power, the Chair- 
man of the Business Committee included. 

RESOLVED, That the special publication of the address made by 
Dr. Richards be referred to a Committee composed of Dr. R. W. Miller, 
Dr. Wm. H. Roberts, Bishop Garland, Bishop Berry and Dr. Steward. 

The Conference is requested to approve of the joint recommendation 
of the Business Committee and of the Committee on Resolutions and 
Findings, asking the uniting of the two Committees as one Committee. 

The Conference took a recess for luncheon at the 
City Club. Closed with prayer by the Chairman. 

Thursday, December 5th, 2:30 p.m. 

The Conference convened at 2:30 p.m., Eev. Edgar 
DeWitt Jones, D.D., presiding. 

The devotional exercises were conducted by Eev. J. 
Wilbur Chapman, D.D. 

The Conference proceeded with the hearing of the 
views of representatives on Church Union. 

The Eef ormed Episcopal Church by Dr. W. A. 

The United Brethren Church by Pres. U. G. Clippen- 
ger, D.D., who presented a paper prepared by Dr. W. F. 

The Christian Union by Eev. A. C. Thomas. 

Having completed the hearing of the representatives 
the Conference spent a brief season in prayer while wait- 
ing for the report of the Business Committee. 

Dr. Wm. H. Eoberts, Chairman of the Business Com- 
mittee, presented part of the report and was followed by 
Dr f H, C. Herring, Secretary of the Committee, who 


read the balance of the report. The report was received 
and approved and the resolutions taken up seriatim and 

Previous to the consideration of the resolutions 
prayer was offered by the Eev. William H. Black, D.D. 
Pending the adoption of the report as a whole, remarks 
were made by Drs. Newman Smyth, Charles R. Erdman, 
Peter Ainslie, E. A. Hanley, Bishop E. S. Lines, George 
E. Hunt, Bishop Joseph F. Berry and Wm. H. Eob- 
erts. The report and resolutions adopted are as follows : 


The Conference, Composed of the Representatives of Seventeen 

Churches, Adopted Unanimously on Thursday, December 5, 1918, 

The Report of its Committee on Business and on Resolutions, 

By a Rising Vote Which is as Follows: 

As representatives of a number of the Protestant Evangelical 
Churches in America, convened in conference to consider questions look- 
ing toward Organic Church Union, we are grateful to God for the motion 
on the part of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, in calling 
us to counsel concerning what may; be done in the furthering of this great 
aim. In the same spirit of appreciation, we recognize that from many other 
sources there are calls challenging us to consider this question as a para- 
mount duty of our day. 

It is agreed among us, that the great world crisis through which we 
have partially passed, and are still passing, has thrust upon us new ob- 
ligations and duties, which we may not disregard. The common ideals 
and dangers, which have come to the front in the great war, have devel- 
oped many latent forces which the Church must be quick to conserve. More- 
over, the unanimity with which our people in the face of their many 
differing traditions, were able to fuse themselves into one body, for the 
common weal of the nation and the world, may be regarded as a hopeful 
prophecy and presage of our churches coming into a like unity, in the 
interests of that great kingdom dear to the heart of God and ourselves. 

We believe in the oneness of the Church of Christ. We worship one 
God and own the Lordship of our Saviour, Jesus Christ. Our Lord ad- 
monished us that "One is our Master and all we are brethren." In His 
last prayer for His disciples, He prays that we may all be one, as He and 
the Father are one. We believe that the Church is one body, whose head 
is the Lord Jesus Christ, and whose life is the presence and power of the 
eternal and immanent Spirit of God. We are called in one hope of our 
calling; we have one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father 
who is above all, and through all, and in all. It is His Divine - Spirit 


which has been travailing through our experiences, to bring us to a unity 
of the faith, a knowledge of the Son of God, and a cooperation in His 
will to bring in the kingdom of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy 
Spirit. We recognize that under the enlightenment of the Divine Spirit, 
who brings us out of darkness into His marvelous light, that the several 
denominations of the Protestant Church have stood and do stand for the 
recovery and maintenance of some special treasures of truth and life, 
which treasures, however, are a heritage that belongs to the universal 
Church of God. We recognize with deep gratitude that these common 
heritages have to a large degree become the possession of all the different 

We are thankful for the growth and increase of the spirit of sym- 
pathetic and fraternal relations between us, which have enabled us to 
gather and inquire what may be the next step in the development of 
our common service. We believe that it is in accordance with the Divine 
purpose and in harmony with the will of Christ, that His Church should 
be one visible body to bear witness to Him among men. Being of one 
mind in those vital and spiritual verities which make us one body in Christ, 
we believe that our Master now challenges us to conquer the divisive 
elements, which segregate us into various and sometimes conflicting 
bodies, and under the guidance of His Spirit to bring the manifold 
treasures which have been garnered in our several histories and expe- 
riences, to a common altar, and there devote them to our Lord and His 
cause. At this altar, we may unitedly pray for that grace which will en- 
able us to discover the will of God, and the movement of His Spirit for 
this new day and generation; and also that we may aim as one body 
to move together and become effective means in God's hands for the 
establishment of His kingdom in the world. So far as we can see, there 
is light along the whole horizon which bids us to be hopeful of effecting 
some form of Organic Church Union. 

In view of the wide opportunity and solemn obligation of the hour, 
the following action is taken: 

1. That the members of this Conference from each communion, 
whether present in official or personal capacity, be asked as soon as pos- 
sible to appoint representatives on an Ad Interim Committee to carry 
forward the movement toward Organic Union here initiated. 

2. The Committee shall b'e composed of one member from each com- 
munion, and one additional member for each 500,000 communicants, or 
major fraction thereof. In addition, the Foreign Missions Conference 
and the Home Mission Council shall each be asked to name one member. 

3. The same privilege of membership on the Committee shall be ex- 
tended to evangelical denominations not represented here. 

4. The members of the Committee appointed by the Presbyterian 
Church in the U. S*. A. are asked to act as the nucleus and convener of 
the ad interim Committee. 

5. This ad interim Committee shall be charged with the following 


(a) To develop and use at its discretion, agencies and methods for 
discovering and creating interest in the subject of Organic Union through- 
out the Churches of the country. 

(b) To make provision for presenting by personal delegations, or 
otherwise, to the national bodies of all the evangelical communions of the 
United States, urgent invitations to participate in an Interdenominational 
Council on Organic Union. 

(c) To lay before the bodies thus approached the steps necessary for 
the holding of such Council, including the plan and basis of representa- 
tion, and the date of the Council which shall be as early as possible, and 
in any event, not later than 1920. 

(d) To prepare for presentation to such Council when it shall as- 
semble a suggested plan or plans of Organic Union. 

(e) To consider and report upon any legal matters related to the plan 
or plans of union which it may propose. 

6. In addition to the above, the Ad Interim Committee is directed to 
report to the Interdenominational Council on any and all matters within 
the field of its inquiries. The Committee will be subject to the juris- 
diction of the Council. 

In requesting the Ad Interim Committee to undertake the arduous 
task outlined, the Conference desires the Committee to proceed with 
freedom at every point. As of possible assistance, however, in the de- 
liberations, the Conference expresses its present judgment as to certain 
aspects of the problem to be faced. 

1. The Conference is profoundly solicitous that the effort for organic 
union shall have first regard to those forces of vital spiritual life which 
alone give meaning to our effort. No mechanical uniformity must be 
sought, nor any form of organization which ignores or thwarts the free 
movement of the Spirit of God, in the hearts of His servants. 

2. In line with this desire the Conference hopes the Committee will 
be able to devise plans so broad and flexible as to make place for all 
the evangelical churches of the land, whatever their outlook of tradition, 
temperament or taste, whatever their relationships racially or historically. 

3. The Conference regards with deep interest and warm approba- 
tion all the movements of our time towards closer cooperative relations 
between communions, especially the notable service rendered by the 
Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America. While the Ad 
Interim Committee's aim and function will lie in a field entirely differ- 
ent from those movements, it will be expected to maintain sympathetic 
relations with them, and to regard with satisfaction any reinforcement 
which its activities may bring to them. 

4. The notice of the Committee is directed to the efforts for Organic 
Union represented in other lands, especially the Churches of Canada. 
The remarkable and significant statement recently issued by a joint com- 
mittee of Anglican and Free Churches of Great Britain will also call for 
the study of the Committee. 

5. The Conference caHs attention to the fact that in its search for 


a plan of Organic Union, the Committee will not be precluded from con- 
sidering plans of Federal Union such as are in varying forms present to 
the minds of members of this Conference. Our nation is a federal un- 
ion but is not the less an organic union. Care should be used not to 
confuse the term " federal" as thus employed, with this meaning when 
used to signify "associated" or "cooperative. " 

6. Last of all, the Conference declares its hope and longing, that the 
evangelical churches may give themselves with a new faith and ardor 
to the proclamation of the gospel of Christ, which is the only hope of 
our stricken world, and to all those ministries of Christian love and 
leading for the community, the nation and the nations, by which they 
shall reveal to men the mind of Christ and hasten the coming of His 

Attest: — 

Wm. H. Roberts, Chairman Business Committee 
Hubert C. Herring, Secretary Business Committee 

The following messages were received during the 
sessions of the Conference, and were ordered made a 
part of the record : 

Buffalo, N. Y., Dec. 3, 1918. 
To Conference on Organic Union of Churches: 

General Evangelical Synod of North America by Buffalo Evangelical 
Pastoral Conference desires to extend to you and other representatives 
their promise of enthusiastic approval and support. We pray for guid- 
ance of God's spirit in your deliberations. G. Siegenthaler. 

Lowell, Mass., Dec. 5, 1918. 
To Bev. Wm. H. Boberts, D.D. 

Presbytery of Newburyport in session suggests merged denomina- 
tions take name The Reformed Church in America. 

A. McDonald Patterson, Clerk. 

Chicago, HI., Dec. 5, 1918. 
To Bev. Dr. Boberts, Chairman. 

The annual Council of the Synod of Chicago of the Reformed Epis- 
copal Church now in session sends its hearty approval of the objects of 
the Conference, praying that some practicable plan may be adopted for 
bringing about a closer union of all the Protestant Churches of the coun- 
try. Samuel Fallows, Presiding Bishop. 

Indianapolis, Ind., Dec. 5, 1918. 
To Inter-Church Conference on Union. 

Best wishes and prayers for success of your meeting. Urgent need 
for Christian unity in the world. Pierre Blommaert, 

Presbyterian Chaplain in Chief of Belgian Armies, 


On motion it was decided to close the Conference 
this evening after the dinner at the Bellevue-Stratford. 

A Committee on Eesolutions of Thanks and Resolu- 
tions regarding the Peace Conference, consisting of Drs. 
W. H. Day, H. H. Font, David G. Downey, F. W. Burn- 
ham and Mr. George M. Warner, was appointed to re- 
port at the evening meeting. 

The following resolution was adopted: 

RESOLVED, That the' papers and proceedings of this Conference ap- 
propriately edited should be collated for publication, and that Rev. Dr. 
Roberts be asked to arrange for such editing and publication, provided due 
provision can be made for the expense thereof. 

The closing prayer was offered by Dr. David Downey. 

Thursday, December 5th, 6:30 p.m. 

The evening session was held at the Bellevue-Strat- 
ford Hotel, in connection with the dinner tendered by the 
Local Committee. Mr. E. W. Bonsall, presiding, acted 
as Toastmaster. The Divine blessing was invoked by 
Rev. J. W. Ashton, D.D. 

After dinner was served the following responded to 
toasts : 

Rev. George E. Hunt, D.D. — Presbyterian Church in 
the U. S. A. 

Rev. W. H. Day, D.D,' — Moderator of the National 
Council of Congregational Churches. 

Dr. J. F. Baltzer — Evangelical Synod of North 

Bishop Ethelbert Talbot — Protestant Episcopal 
Church in the U. S. 

The Committee on Resolutions of Thanks and Resolu- 
tions regarding the Peace Conference, Dr. Day, Chair- 
man, presented its report which, on motion, was unani- 
mously adopted as follows : 

Philadelphia, December 5, 1918. 
The Conference on Organic Union places on record its sense of obli- 
gation to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the V. S. 


A. and its Standing Committee on Church Cooperation and Union for 
the vision and faith evidenced in its call for such a Conference, and 
for the opportunity thus given to the Evangelical Churches to take the 
preliminary steps for the organization of a Council on Organic Union. 

It expresses its high appreciation of the work of the Program Com- 
mittee and the careful preparation for the comfort and convenience 
made by the Interdenominational Local Committee of Arrangements. 

It further extends its grateful thanks to the Presbyterian Board 
of Publication for placing at its disposal the excellent facilities of the 
Witherspoon Building, already historic in interdenominational move- 
ments, to Calvary Presbyterian Church for the use of its commodious 
edifice, to the Press for full and accurate publicity, and to the Secre- 
taries for their careful and efficient performance of their important 

While we are here seeking the visible union of the Churches of 
Christ, we are not unmindful of the soon coming Conference across the 
seas in the interest of World Peace and Union, and we fervently pray 
that the teachings of our Divine Lord and Master may be the basis of 
international peace and justice, to the end that national and racial hatred 
both as between nations and peoples within nations may speedily be 
done away, and there be ushered in the new era of peace and goodwill. 

On motion of Dr. Wm. H. Eoberts it was voted to 
place on record the felicitation of the Conference to the 
United Lutheran Chnrch in America for bringing into 
one church three different bodies, and the Conference ex- 
pressed the hope that the United Lutheran Church in 
America may go on to further unify all the Lutheran 

It was voted to refer the Minutes for approval to 
the officers. 

The presiding officer called upon Dr. Rufus W. Miller, 
Secretary of the Conference, to give the closing word, 
after which the Conference adjourned with singing, "My 
Country, 'Tis of Thee," and the Benediction by Dr. 
Charles S. MacFarland, Secretary of the Federal Coun- 
cil of the Churches of Christ in America. 

Rurus W. Miller, 


The following are the papers presented to the Con- 
ference by the representatives expressive of their views 
on organic union : 



The Attitude and Purpose of the Presbyterian Church, U. S. A., in 
the matter of a call for an Interdenominational Council of Evangelical 
Churches to consider the question of their organic union. 
The Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A., in common with other evan- 
gelical communions, has felt an increasing desire for a closer union of 
the Christian bodies of America. This desire has been greatly augmented 
since the outbreak of the world war which is drawing our people together 
along all lines of their life, and was given definite expression by the action 
of the 130th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A., 
at Columbus, Ohio, which recorded the "profound conviction that the 
time has come for organic union of the evangelical churches of America, ' ' 
and provided "that this Assembly hereby overtures the national bodies 
of the evangelical communions of America to meet with our representatives 
for the purpose of formulating a plan of organic union. " 

In taking this) action the purpose of the Presbyterian Church is simply 
to invite her brethren in Christ to meet and counsel together with a view 
to finding a way by which we may outwardly and concretely express that 
spiritual union which we believe already exists among the people of Christ. 

Our church is further moved to this step by her sense of the new and 
heavy responsibilities now resting on us all, and which must grow heavier 
in the new day coming to the world as the result of the great war, re- 
sponsibilities which we feel cannot be adequately met in our separate 
capacities, but which we are persuaded can be effectively carried by a 
union of existing forces. Such a consummation would present to man- 
kind a united witness of our common faith and also equip and perfe'ct the 
church for the maximum of service to her Lord and the world for which 
He died. Wm. H. Roberts, 

Chairman Committee on Church 
Cooperation and Union. 



By Rev. Wm. H. Roberts, D.D. 

The position of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. as to the church, 
as to the Christian ministry, as to Christian fellowship and as to religious 


liberty is presented principally in quotations from the constitution of the 
church, or the Acts of its General Assembly. 

I. As to the Church 

Chapter 25 of the Confession of Faith adopted in Westminster Abbey, 
England, and in the Jerusalem Chamber, by the Westminster Assembly, in 
1647-8, in its first and second sections reads as follows: I. "The catholic 
or universal church, which is invisible, consists of the whole number of 
the elect, that have been, or shall be gathered into one, under Christ the 
head thereof; and is the spouse, the body, the fullness of him that filleth 
all in all." 

II. ' ' The visible church, which is also catholic or universal under the 
gospel (not confined to one nation, as before under the law), consists of all 
those throughout the world, that profess the true religion, together with 
their children, and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and 
family of God, out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation.' ' 

In 1788, the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A., organized as a de- 
nomination in 1706, adopted its present constitution, and in the Form of 
Government, chapter 2, section 2, defined the universal church as follows: 

II. "The universal church consists of all those persons, in every 
nation, together with their children, who make profession of the holy re- 
ligion of Christ, and of submission to his laws." 

In the same year, 1788, to make clear their view of the Christian 
standing of all believers, the following definition of a particular church 
was adopted: 

III. "As this immense multitude cannot meet together in one place, 
to hold commuion, or to worship God, it is reasonable, and warranted by 
Scripture exabnple, that they should be divided into many particular 
churches. ' ' 

IV. "A particular church consists of a number of professing Chris- 
tians, with their offspring, voluntarily associated together, for divine wor- 
ship and godly living, agreeably to the Holy Scriptures; and submitting 
to a certain form of government. ' ' 

It is to be noted specially that the last clause of chapter II, section 
iv, does not read "and submit to a Presbyterian form of government. ' ' 
The form of government the particular church submits to is to be de- 
termined by its own members. 

II. As to Christian Fellowship 

In chapter 26 of the Confession of Faith entitled, ' ' Of the communion 
of saints," sections I and II read as follows: I. "All saints that are 
united to Jesus Christ their head, by his Spirit and by faith, have fellow- 
ship with him in his graces, sufferings, death, resurrection and glory: 
and, being united to one another in love, they have communion in each 
other 's gifts and graces ; and are obliged to the performance of such duties, 
public and private, as do conduce to their mutual good, both in the in- 
ward and outward man." 


II. "Saints, by profession, are bound to maintain an holy fellowship 
and communion, in the worship of God, and in performing such other 
spiritual services as tend to their mutual edification; as also in relieving 
each other in outward things, according to their several abilities and ne- 
cessities. Which communion, as God offereth opportunity, is to be ex- 
tended unto all those, who, in every place, call upon the name of the 
Lord Jesus.' ' 

This is a very broad statement as to the warrant and manner of Chris- 
tian fellowship, and of the obligations which it places upon all who pro- 
fess the name of Christ. 

III. Right of Private Judgment 

In chapter I of the form of government entitled "Preliminary Prin- 
ciples,' ' sections I and II read: I. "That 'God alone is Lord of the 
conscience; and hath left it free from the doctrine and commandments of 
men, which are in anything contrary to his word, or beside it in matters 
of faith and worship. y Therefore, they consider the rights of private 
judgment, in all matters that respect religion, as universal and unalienable ; 
they do not even wish to see any religious constitution aided by the civil 
power; further than may be necessary for protection and security, and, 
at the same time, be equal and common to all others." 

II. ' ' That, in perfect consistency with the above principle of com- 
mon right, every Christian church, or union or association of particular 
churches, is entitled to declare the terms of admission into its communion, 
and the qualifications of its ministers and members, as well as the whole 
system of its internal government which Christ hath appointed; that, in the 
exercise of this right they may, notwithstanding, err, in making the terms 
of communion either too lax or too narrow; yet, even in this case, they 
do not infringe upon the liberty, or the rights of others, but only make 
an improper use of their own." 

It is to be emphasized in this connection that preceding the declara- 
tion of principles, these words appear: "They are unanimously of 
opinion." There was absolutely no difference of view among Presbyterians 
in colonial days as to the right of private judgment, as to the separation 
of church and state, and as to the right of every Christian church to de- 
termine the whole system of its own internal government. 

IV. Relation to the State 

While in the American Republic religious liberty is assured, it is of 
interest to quote what the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. declared as 
to this liberty in 1788, as set forth in chapter xxiii of the Confession of 
Faith entitled, "Of the civil magistrate," and in part of section 3: 

II. "As nursing fathers, it is the duty of civil magistrates to protect 
the church of our common Lord, without giving the preference to any 
denomination of Christians above the rest, in such a manner that all 
ecclesiastical persons whatever shall enjoy the full, free and unquestioned 
liberty of discharging every part of their sacred functions, without violence 


or danger. And, as Jesus Christ hath appointed a regular government 
and discipline in his church, no law of any commonwealth should interfere 
with, let, or hinder, the due exercise thereof, among the voluntary mem- 
bers of any denomination of Christians, according to their own profession 
and belief. It is the duty of civil magistrates to protect the person and 
good name of all their people, in such an effectual ^manner as that no 
person be suffered, either upon pretence of religion or of infidelity, to 
offer any indignity, violence, abuse, or injury to any other person what- 
soever; and to take order, that all religious and ecclesiastical assemblies 
be held without molestation or disturbance. ' ' 

All the above quotations show clearly that the Presbyterian Church 
in the U. S. A. holds that a universal visible church of Jesus Christ exists 
in the world, that it is the duty of Christians to recognize one another 
as members of that universal church, that every particular church has 
the right to determine is own form of government and the manner of 
its worship within the universal church, and that religious liberty is the 
right of all Christians and of all Christian churches) and societies. The 
word " liberty" is emphasized by Presbyterians as over against the word 
11 toleration. ' ' In the United States there is no establishment of religion, 
and what exists is not toleration but liberty, and, finally, this religious 
liberty is to be maintained by the civil magistrate as the right of all 
persons who profess a religion. 

V. History 

The Presbyterian Church in t the U. S. A., in relation to church union 
and Christian fellowship has always been prepared to put its principles 
into practice. 

In 1704 the Presbyterians and Congregationalists of New England 
adopted Heads of Agreement whose title read ''Heads of agreement as- 
sented to by the united ministers formerly called Presbyterian and Con- 
gregational. ' f 

In 1766 the Presbyterians and the Congregationalists of the colonies 
entered into an agreement for the spread of the Gospel and the defense 
of the religious liberty. They established a General Convention represent- 
ing these bodies which met annually until 1775. 

Since the achievement of American Independence, the Presbyterian 
Church in the U. S. A., as previously, has held out an open hand to all other 
Protestant churches. It is sufficient as evidence in this connection to quote 
the following Acts of the General Assembly; 1. The Resolution of the 
General Assembly establishing the Committee on Church Cooperation and 
Union adopted in 1903, and since that annually reaffirmed: "The Presby- 
terian Church holds Christian fellowship with all who confess and obey 
Jesus Christ as their divine Savior and Lord, and acknowledges the duty 
of all churches that recognize Him, as the only Head of the church uni- 
versal, to work together in harmony and love, for the extension of His 
kingdom and the good of the world; and this Assembly earnestly desires 
to commend and promote this Christian cooperation, and also practically 


to advance the cause of church union by confederation, and, where pos- 
sible, by consolidation among the churches of the Reformed Faith, which 
are most nearly akin in doctrine and organization. 

2. The action of the General Asse'mbly in 1918, at Columbus, Ohio: 

" Overtures 1-34, on the organic union of all American evangelical 
churches, making petition to the General Assembly as follows: 

1 ' That it overture the national bodies of our sister communions to 
hear and prayerfully consider a program for church union. 

"That the General Assembly name a time and place, as early as pos- 
sible, for an interdenominational council of evangelical churches. 

"That our Assembly state frankly, in this call, that the purpose of 
the council is to discuss and, if the way be clear, to adopt a definite 
plan of organic church union. " 

The committee, before recommending any action, desires to congrat- 
ulate the General Assembly and, through it, the whole church, that these 
overtures show that there is an earnest desire for church unity growing 
in power in the hearts of many, and a determined effort put forth to 
accomplish the same. 

It is to be noted that our church has long been forward in its ex- 
pression and effort looking toward the reunion and the union of the evan- 
gelical churches of America. 

The committee recommends the following action: 

"That we, the comlmissioners to the One Hundred and Thirtieth Gen- 
eral Assembly now in session at Columbus, Ohio, do declare and place on 
record our profound conviction that the time has come for organic church 
union of the evangelical churches of America. 

' ' That this Assembly hereby overtures the national bodies of the evan- 
gelical communions of America to meet with our representatives for the 
purpose of formulating a plan of organic union. 

"That the Assembly's Committee on Cooperation and Union be 
authorized and directed to designate the place and time, not later than 
January 1, 1919, for the above-named convention; to prepare a suitable 
invitation, etc.; and to attend to all necessary arrangements. 

The action just quoted, unanimously adopted by a rising vote, is 
the reason for the invitation extended for the present conference on or- 
ganic union. The Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. is prepared to 
take up and discuss the whole subject of organic union from any and 
every viewpoint. 


By Rev. Peter Ainslie, D.D. 

The people known in the modern world as the Disciples of Christ arose 
about a hundred years ago in the Presbyterian household out of a de- 
sire for freedom in the practice of the catholicity of religion as a definite 


step toward the unity of Christendom. The cardinal note of their mes- 
sage is the unity of the church in order to an effectual world-wide 
witness bearing for Christ. 

Agreeing with all evangelical Christians on the great fundamentals 
of our conimon faith, the Disciples have sought a basis of union by 
eliminating those things as tests of fellowship about which Christians dif- 
fer and by uniting on those things on which there is universal agree- 
ment. Their message therefore has had nothing to do with the formation 
of a new creed, nor did they intend originally to form a new communion. 
The movement developed into a separate communion contrary to the ex- 
pectation and against the wishes of those who started it. To avoid 
creating another communion they allied themselves with one of the 
larger communions and remained in its fellowship for nearly twenty 
years, withdrawing from it only when forced to do so by circumstances 
which they could not control. Even now it is not too much to affirm 
that they possess in their spirit that same willingness to be allied with 
other co'mmunions if thereby the number of communions may be lessened 
and they be allowed their freedom to plead for Christian union by a 
return to the beliefs and practices of the apostolic church. 

They sought in the beginning and they seek now to build upon the 
great catholic principles upon which all Christendom is agreed. The 
catholicity of their message may be summed up under six heads: 

I. A Catholic Name 

They give the heartiest recognition to all Christian bodies, and rec- 
ognize Christians in the Greek Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Anglican and 
Protestant communions. The names of these various communions, how- 
ever, they regard as divisive and as perpetuating divisions, contrary to 
the prayer of Jesus and the teachings of the New Testament. None of 
these names is catholic. The Eastern Orthodox Church is not a proper 
designation, because the term Orthodox is used in this name to distinguish 
one particular body of Christians as separate from others. Even the name 
Roman Catholic is not catholic, for the term Roman destroys its catholicity 
and makes it provincial. The only names truly catholic are those fur- 
nished by the Scriptures and are, for the individual believers, "disciples," 
"disciples of Christ," "Christians," "friends," "saints," etc., and 
for the whole body, "the church/' "churches of Christ," and "church 
of God," and by implication, "Christian church.' Therefore to the 
Disciples there are no other names to wear but the catholic names of the 
Scriptures, which all believers and churches use, but in a secondary sense. 
The Disciples have sought by wearing these names to the exclusion of all 
others to make their use primary and have urged other believers to do 

II. A Catholic Creed 

When the Disciples arose all communions had separate creeds, and by 
their creeds they were separated. The creeds therefore were divisive and 


not catholic. It was not a question of the truth or error of the creeds; 
they were venerable expressions of the faith of the church. But as state- 
ments of truth they are exclusive and designed not to include and unite, 
but to exclude and divide. One communion would not accept the creed 
of another communion, but all communions accept Jesus as Lord and 
Saviour. The Disciples, therefore seeking for an all-inclusive creed which 
would unite all Christians, went back to the beginning of the church and 
found their creed in the simple confession of the Messiahship and Lord- 
ship of Jesus and the commitment of their lives in obedience to him. To 
those expressing a desire to follow Christ they ask not so 'much what they 
believe as whom they believe. Every person, therefore, deciding for Christ, 
is asked to affirm publicly his belief in Jesus as the Christ, the only be- 
gotten Son of God, and his Lord and Saviour. This is catholic ground 
and is proposed by the Disciples as the simple and sufficient confession 
in which all believers can unite in the expression of their faith in Jesus 

III. A Catholic Book 

All Christians and communions accept the Scriptures as containing 
the Word of God. In a very distinct sense is this true of Protestants, 
but the various communions have their systems of theology, based upon 
interpretations of the Word of God, and which they adopt as standards 
for their respective 'churches. From many of these systems of theology 
the Disciples do not dissent. They would, however, make them schools of 
thought, instead of standards of doctrine, for to make those interpreta- 
tions the standards of different groups of Christians is divisive, and opposed 
to catholicity. Since all agree that the Scriptures contain the Word of 
God, why could not the Scriptures alone be sufficient? They appear to 
have been so for the early church. Why should they not be so for the 
church now? The distinctive message of Protestantism has always been 
justification by faith, the sole authority of the Scriptures, and the right 
of private interpretation. The Disciples, believing heartily in these prin- 
ciples, adopt them to an ultimate conclusion, and going beyond Protestant 
creeds and systems of theology, take the Scriptures to be sufficient for 
the rule of Christian life, acting upon the principle expressed in the 
phrase of Chillingworth : "The Bible and the Bible alone is the religion 
of Protestants." Here again they seek catholic ground and taking the 
Scriptures as their only book of authority they seek to persuade others 
to take this catholic book as their sole book of authority. 

IV. A Catholic Administration of the Ordinances 

Having committed themselves to a catholic policy for the union of 
the church, the Disciples were compelled by the logic of their position 
to find a way for the practice of catholicity in the administration of the 
ordinances of baptisni and the Lord's Supper. Concerning these matters, 
Christians have long been dreadfully divided. On the question of baptism, 
after a lono" and painful wrestling with the facts as they came to view 
them and through long and diligent examination of the Scriptures, the 


Disciples, at great cost to their own hearts in giving up much that had 
been precious, were constrained to adopt the immersion of penitent 
believers as the one baptism which seemed to them most truly Scriptural 
and therefore the one on which all could agree. For infant baptism they 
prefer to substitute the dedication of children, remembering that the little 
child is; the one model which Jesus held up before all who would be fit for 
the kingdom. The Lord's Supper they .conceive to be the supreme act of 
unity and catholicity, sustaining and expressing both the union of the 
believer with Christ and the underlying oneness of the whole church of 
God. In its observance, therefore, the utmost of catholicity must prevail. 
Accordingly, both in theory and practice, the Disciples hold the Lord's 
Supper open to persons of all communions, simply expecting each Chris- 
tian to examine his own heart and to participate according to the dictates 
of his own conscience, thus cherishing the fact of the sacrament and 
leaving its interpretation to the individual believer. As to the season of 
the Lord's Supper, the Disciples practice the weekly observance. On these 
vital matters the Disciples have earnestly sought catholic ground, desiring 
most heartily to find a position which would be in strictest accord with the 
truth and on which all Christians can unite. 

V. A Catholic Polity of Church Government 


In matters of government the Disciples are a pure democracy. Be- 
ginning as they do with the primary principle of catholicity in all things, 
they recognize the universal equality, spiritual suffrage and priesthood of 
all believers. In all matters of practical organization and administration, 
therefore, each congregation conducts its own affairs in its own way, 
subject to the teachings of the Scriptures and consistent with the honor 
of religion and the good name and well-being of the whole church, directly 
accountable in all things to Him who is the Head of the church, Jesus 
Christ. For those great systems of church government and ecclesiastical 
polity which have been developed through the centuries the Disciples have 
the greatest respect. Nevertheless they cannot but regard these systems 
as in many ways essentially uncatholic and undemocratic, making as they 
do distinctions, orders and classes among believers, among whom Christ 
declared there should be no distinction, saying, "One is your Master, 
even Christ, and all ye are brethren." These systems serve the purposes 
not of unity, but of division, and in the last analysis violate the cath- 
olicity of the church of God. In this important connection the Disciples 
have endeavored zealously to find a basis of organization and administra- 
tion which would be true to those constitutional principles given by 
Christ for the government of His church and which would be catholic 
ground on which all Christians can agree and unite. 

VI. A Catholic Brotherhood 

Holding the universal brotherhood of all Christians as a most precious 
fact, the Disciples have sought for the widest possible fellowship. They 
hold fast to the heritage guaranteed by the word of the great Apostle, 


"All are yours. " Therefore they would not be estranged from any, but 
would have fellowship with all. Sometimes they have faltered in this, 
and they have come far short of the mark, nevertheless the ideal has ever 
been cherished in their hearts. "By this shall all men know that ye are 
my disciples, if ye have love one to another. " Two paths have reached 
out before the Disciples — one to proclaim the Gospel upon this basis to 
the whole world, and upon this they have grown to their present size; the 
other to make overtures to other conVmunions for cooperation in a common 
service to God. In the latter they have not been so successful, but they 
are not discouraged, for they yet expect that around the conference table 
they will be able with all others to present that which they hold as their 
sacred, trust, willing to say now, as Thomas Campbell, one of their earliest 
leaders said a hundred years ago, that if there is "a better way to regain 
and preserve that Christian unity and charity expressly enjoined upon the 
church of God they will be thankful for its discovery and will cheerfully 
embrace it, " believing most confidently that one way or another the whole 
church of God will, in due time, "attain to the unity of the faith." 

The supreme passion of the Disciples of Christ is the union of all 
Christians in order to the exaltation of Christ and the salvation of a lost 
world. They believe that a divided church means an infidel world. Their 
one aim and hope has been, therefore, that their movement might so'me- 
how be used of God as one step toward the clearing of the atmosphere of 
all conflicting theories and toward the healing of the unhappy divisions 
of His church. This is their only apology for a separate existence. They 
believe that the union of the church of God is as much a part of the 
divine program as the death of Jesus on the cross and His resurrection 
from the tomb. 



By Rev. William M. Anderson, D.D. 

The United Presbyterian Church originated in the union of the Associate 
and the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Churches. These smaller sisters 
of the Presbyterian faith forming this union have an honorable history 
in the defense of the Gospel through persecution and bloody sacrifice. 
Their forbears laid down their lives willingly that we might possess in 
heritage the Gospel of Christ in all of its purity. 

The ancient Culdees, servants of God, had much to do in the early 
evangelization of Scotland and their presentation of the truth was in all 
of its primitive simplicity. But the glittering form of popery intro- 
duced by Augustine in the year 603, lured these earnest people away from 
their faith in exchanging the orders of Rome for the simple presbyterial 
forms of the Culdees. The corruptions introduced through papal agents 
brought about the reformation period of the 16th century and the or- 
ganization of the established church of Scotland in the year 1560. The 


names of such martyrs as Patrick Hamilton and George Wishart will ever 
be held in precious memory as long as the annals of ecclesiastical history 
may be read. These shed their blood in martyrdom rather than surrender 
to the corruptions of papal Rome. Sad to relate the established church 
became a prey to designing and unscrupulous men, who not only held to 
unsound truth, but filled the vacant pulpits of congregations with undesir- 
able and ignorant men whose presence was a menace to the peace and har- 
mony of the congregations. Protests were made against the abuse of this 
patronage with no avail and pastors were often installed with the use of 
the sword and bayonet against the will of the people. Any published 
statements of the orthodox doctrine were condemned by the ruling powers 
of the General Assembly and the publishers accused of following divisive 
courses. These high-handed acts of the Assembly brought about a seces- 
sion of ministers whose names are familiar to all of the Presbyterian faith. 
Among the seceders are the names of the Erskines, Boston, Moncrieff and 
others. These ministers organized in 1733 the Associate Presbyterian 
Church of Scotland and twenty years afterward, at the request of immi- 
grants already arrived in America, sent forth two missionaries in the 
persons of Alexander Gellaty and Andrew Arnot. These established mis- 
sions in the counties of York, Lancaster and Chester. This work in the 
New World prospered and was constantly augmented by the arrival of 
brethren from across the seas. Two presbyteries were formed; — one in 
Pennsylvania and the other in New York. In 1782 a union was effected 
between these two presbyteries and the Reformed Presbyterian presbytery 
of America. The latter was the lineal descendant of the Church of Scot- 
land. The new organization was called the Associate Reformed Presby- 
terian Church, a combination of the two names forming the union. 

A considerable number from each party refused to join the new or- 
ganization and continued in their separate existence. The United Pres- 
byterian Church of North America is the final union of the Associate and 
the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Churches. This organization was 
completed in the city of Pittsburgh on the 26th day of May, 1858. This 
happy event was consummated as a result of the month previous being 
given over, by both bodies, to prayer and conference with the consequent 
out-pouring of the Holy Ghost. The scene in Old City Hall, Pittsburgh, 
where the union was enacted would be hard to describe. Three thousand 
persons witnessed the event. Never had they heard such fervent prayers, 
such soul-stirring addresses nor such a volume in songs of praise. The 
two moderators joined hands in the symbol of the union effected. Dr. D. 
C. McClaren, of the Associate Reformed Church, took the hand of Dr. J. T. 
Cooper, of the Associate Church, saying: — "In the presence of this as- 
sembly, in the presence of the members of this synod, and in the pres- 
ence of Almighty God, I extend to you, my brother, the right hand of 
fellowship in love indeed and may this union be to the glory of God for- 
ever: Amen. " Dr. Cooper replied: — "Most cordially do I reciprocate the 
expression of my dear brother's heart. In the name of the Associate 
Synod of North America, I give a brother's hand and a brother's heart. 


Let our hands thus linked together be the token and the dmblem of this 
union. Here let us pledge our mutual fidelity and our mutual love. Let 
us bury in a common grave our past differences. Here we have unfurled 
our banner, on one side 'The Truth of God/ and on the other 'Forbear- 
ance in Love. ' Let us follow our glorious Captain and seek to glory only 
in His cross. " The United Presbyterian Church started with 419 minis- 
ters and 54,789 members. Through these years, outside of our extensive 
mission fields, the United Presbyterian Church has grown to 982 minis- 
ters and 158,980 members. The Westminster Confession of Faith with 
slight modifications and the catechisms, larger and shorter, with 18 articles 
of testimony form the basis of creed of the United Presbyterian Church. 
Scriptural Psalmody to the exclusion of human compositions is employed in 
the worship of God. In the making of many song books there is no end 
and many of them are a weariness to the flesh. The United Presbyterian 
Church will be slow to surrender this book of praise for any made by men. 
Our denomination is also confident that God's precious volume of praise 
is the only book that is free from sectarianism and would recommend it as 
the praise book, for the proposed organic church. The United Presbyterian 
Church is opposed to secret associations which impose upon their members 
an oath of secrecy to obey an unknown code of laws because such obliga- 
tions are contrary to the spirit and genius of Christianity. Let it be said 
that this rule is administered with great charity and with the deepest 
sympathy for those entangled in the bonds of secrecy. 

The denomination has never removed from its articles the one opposed 
to slavery, because in some of its missionary fields the traffic in human 
lives is secretly continued and some of our converts have been rescued 
from the bonds of actual slavery. While the position of the United Pres- 
byterian Church on this evil is historic, yet when the fields where our mis- 
sionaries labor are freed from the sin of slavery our denomination most 
readily will remove the article as obsolete. 

Many believe that denominations have been a hindrance to the prog- 
ress of Christianity, yet we recognize that they have been permitted, of 
God, to bear to the world, with emphasis, some phase of evangelical truth. 
There are, without question, sad cases of over-lapping churches in occupied 
territories. The United Presbyterian Church at its last General Assembly 
adopted the articles of federation, without a dissenting voice, looking to- 
ward the eradication of such mistakes in the past and the prevention of 
such waste of money and effort in the future. At a recent meeting of our 
committee on cordial relations, a resolution was adopted to be presented 
to the next General Assembly, stating that we ever stand obedient to the 
will of the Holy Spirit in the matter of organic union and that we are 
willing to unite with other denominations on a mutually satisfactory basis. 
It is impossible to surrender convictions on things essential, but if any 
of our position on distinctives or doctrine is not founded upon the 
Word of God, no denomination will be readier to surrender its holdings 
when the error is shown. 

It seems to us that no effective union can be accomplished by negoti- 


ation alone. It is worthy of note that preceding the happy day of 1858 
when the United Presbyterian church ca'me into existence there had been 
many heart-searching days at Xenia, Ohio, where the two branches form- 
ing the organization waited upon God in prayer. The subject was not 
organic union, but rather the needs of the individual and the church. 

There was a true revival of religion in their midst and as the waters 
of two rivers meet, those two peoples naturally flowed together. . 

There is in all of us much of the natural man with his pride and 
selfishness and these must be burned out by the power of the Holy Ghost 
and His cleansing fire, before organic union can be effected. The heritage 
of our ancestry rests upon the United Presbyterian Church in its jealousy 
for the Word of God, purity of worship and the call to missionary effort. 
The old Associate organization of seceders was but twenty years old when 
their missionaries crossed the Atlantic to plant the standard of the cross 
of Christ among the pioneers of the New World. Since that time the de- 
scendants of these brave men have been recrossing the seas with the same 
precious treasure of the Gospel to feed 16,000,000 needy souls in Egypt, 
India and the Sudan. It is a pleasant thought that in the midst of the 
great battles of the Western Front, the United Presbyterian boys from 
Northern India fought, side by side with the pale-faced United Presby- 
terian brothers of America, for a common cause of righteousness. Our 
denomination stands committed to a federated agreement uniting all of 
the Reformed churches in America holding the Presbyterian system, in a 
working agreement which in the future will prevent all waste of money, 
effort and missionaries. Such a basis of union is feasible for the present. 
It can be patterned after the system of our Federal government. It will 
provide for the hu'man element of choice in the forms and order of wor- 
ship. Farther than that plan we cannot promise to go at the present. It 
is a step toward unity and it is organic union. Care must be taken that 
no denomination shall be divided and made impotent to carry on its large 
missionary enterprises. More divisions would defeat the 'high purposes for 
which this conference is met. We can, however, look forward hopefully 
in the prayer of our Lord, when these "may all be one, even as thou, 
Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us; that the 
world may believe that thou didst send me. ' ' 



By Mr. George M. Warner 

As representing the Society of Friends, unofficially, we must at once ex- 
press our hearty appreciation of the courtesy extended to us by the invita- 
tion to join this conference, and our prayerful desire that it may bring 
us closer together in Christian fellowship and a better understanding of 
our various positions. 

We believe that those who are in Christ are thereby united in an 


eternal bond: at the same time we recognize the existing diversity of view, 
not on the fundamentals of Christian doctrine, but on the methods by 
which the various branches of the church universal seek to give effective 
expression to their principles. In the practice of worship and the work of 
the ministry of the Gospel we feel that our methods in which we differ 
from others are an essential part of our service to humanity, however 
sadly we fail, as we do, in realizing our ideals. In the absence of ritual 
and in the direct waiting upon God we find a living spiritual worship com- 
bined with the exercise of a vocal ministry dependent upon His Holy 
Spirit for its inspiration and power. 

As we are met together for fellowship and mutual good-will, the 
views of the Society of Friends as to the sacraments and ordinances, war, 
the use of oaths, and the simple life need not be stated here. But we hold 
that the events of this present time summon us all to that exercise of serv- 
ice to humanity in the relief of suffering and in countless other ways, by 
which the sincerity and reality of our Faith shall finally be judged. In 
this service we join hands without reserve and with joyful endeavor, with 
all who love the Lord Jesus Christ. 

We believe that the unity which we find in this service, world-wide 
national, civic, public or private, is in itself a true bond of fellowship. We 
are unable to see in looking over the whole field that all Christian bodies 
are at present ripe for any closer outward or official union. But we cher- 
ish the hope that in the providence of God, by seeking His ways which are 
higher than our ways and through his thoughts which are higher 
than our thoughts, His children the world over may in the coming 
years realize together a more united and fruitful service for the Redeem- 
er's kingdom. 


By Bishop C. L. Moench, D.D. 

Organic Union of the Evangelical Churches m the United States ffom the 

Moravian Standpoint 

As on this occasion an historical presentation is not desired, it will be suf- 
ficient by way of introduction merely to indicate the historic position of 
the Moravian Church on church unity, by mentioning only two striking il- 
lustrations. In 1570 the Moravian Church aided in bringing about the 
" Consensus- Scndomiriensis," which was a more or less organic union of 
the Lutheran, Reformed and Bohemian-Moravian Brethren, effected at a 
joint synod held at Sendomir in Poland in 1570, and although too far in 
advance of the age to become permanent, did exist for a number of years. 
Again, in 1742, here in Pennsylvania, Zinzendorf took a leading part 
in organizing the " Pennsylvania Synod of the Church of God in the 
Spirit' ' which embraced all the sects and churches then existent princi- 
pally among the German settlers in Eastern Pennsylvania. This also, how- 


ever, was too far in advance of the spirit of the age, and one by one the 
various constituents withdrew, until by 1748 only the Moravians were left 
and it became a Moravian synod. 

The Moravian Church has ever consistently identified itself with, and 
participated in, every union and federated movement from that day to 

Prior to the Thirty- Years '-War, owing to the necessities of the then ex- 
isting political and ecclesiastical conditions, the Bohemian-Moravian Breth- 
ren formulated a number of ' ' Confessions ' ' for presentation to rulers, 
and in order to define their position in the realm and among the other 
reformed churches as well as over against the Roman Catholic Church and 
the Utraqmst or national church of Bohemia. But after the horrors of 
the Thirty- Years '-War and the frightful persecutions of the Jesuitical- Anti- 
Reformation of the 17th Century, — which reduced the population of Bo- 
hemia and Moravia from three million to eight hundred thousand, and the 
membership of the Bohemian-Moravian-Brethren 's-Church from two hun- 
dred thousand to a few scattered parishes and a few hundred members 
ministered unto secretly by their priests and their bishops consecrated in 
spem contra spem — and, after the resuscitation of the church on the es- 
tates of Count Zinzendorf in Saxony, the Renewed Brethren's or Moravian 
Church avoided the formulation of any "Confession" or "Creed. " Zin- 
zendorf planned to unite in the Brethren's Church what he called the 
Lutheran, Reformed and Moravian "Tropes" (from the Greek word 
"TpoTros" — a way of life), without requiring anyone to surrender any doc- 
trinal tenets. The only doctrinal statement which the modern Moravian 
Church uses in its official and public services, apart from the Apostles' 
Creed and (rarely) the Nicene Creed, is the Confession of Faith made 
each year on Easter morning, which is phrased exclusively in the words 
of New-Testament Scripture, without any human interpolations, apart from 
connective words, or interpretations of any kind whatsoever. 

While thoroughly evangelical in its doctrinal position, the Moravian 
Church requires no subscription to any formulated creed of any kind. 
Historically and for political reasons, it has expressed itself in sympathy 
with the Augsburg Confession and with the Thirty-Nine-Articles of the 
Church of England, but has never considered either its clergy or laity as 
bound by them in any way. Anyone who accepts Jesus the Christ, the 
only begotten Son of God, coequal with the Father, as divine Lord and 
Master and as the only Saviour from sin, because of His atoning and vica- 
rious sacrifice, is eligible for membership in the ranks both of the laity 
and clergy of the Moravian Church without any other doctrinal test. 

There are, therefore, no creedal obstacles to organic union with any 
and all other evangelical churches as far as the Moravian Church is con- 

As far as church order is concerned, the Moravian Church is an episcopal 
church. It secured its episcopate through the Waldensian bishops, who in 
turn, had it from the Roman Church. Even in the days of the bitterest 
persecutions the validity and canonicity of its priesthood were never de- 


nied by its most virulent enemies in either the Utraqmst or Roman Catholic 
Churches of Bohemia and Moravia, and, after its resuscitation, the Eng- 
lish Parliament, after an exhaustive investigation, by special Act of Par- 
liament (signed May 12, 1749), the House of Lords concurring, including, 
therefore, the bishops of the Church of England, nemine co'ntradicente, 
acknowledged the Unitas Fratrum (the Moravian Church), was an ancient 
episcopal church. In the modern Moravian Church, however, the bishops 
have no governing or executive powers by virtue of their episcopate, — only 
as they may be elected to executive offices by synod. The episcopate 
in the modern Moravian Church is exclusively a spiritual office, designed 
specifically for the perpetuation of the ordained ministry. Only bishops 
may ordain candidates for the specific ministry in the church of Christ. 

The Moravian Church has maintained unbroken through the centuries 
its historic episcopal succession, and hence likewise the threefold order of 
the ministry-deacon, presbyter (priest) and bishop. 

At the same time, it acknowledges without reservation, the validity of 
the ministerial functions exercised by the clergy of all other churches, 
allows such clergy to officiate in its pulpits without any restrictions, and 
accepts such clergy into the ranks of its own ministry without re-ordination. 
They have been ordained once, even as its own deacons have been ordained 
once, and they are received on that basis. A Moravian deacon may ad- 
minister the sacraments and perform all other ministerial functions. Af- 
ter having approved himself for at least two years he is advanced to the 
second order of the ministry and ordained a presbyter. All clergy of 
other churches, if they desire to enter the service of the Moravian Church, 
are received on the basis of a deacon and at once allowed to exercise all 
ministerial functions on an absolute parity with all other Moravian minis- 
ters; then if they approve themselves in the ministry of the Moravian 
Church, they, too, are advanced to the second order of the ministry and 
ordained presbyters, just as any Moravian deacon would be and thus nor- 
mally and naturally enter into the episcopally ordained succession, with- 
out the slightest reflection on the validity of their original ordination or 
of their original ministerial standing. 

There are, therefore, no obstacles in the way of organic union with 
other evangelical churches as far as ministerial polity and order of the 
Moravian Church are concerned. 

The Moravian Church would deeply deplore the elimination of the his- 
toric episcopate. At the cost of tremendous sacrifice it has maintained 
this ministry through centuries. 

If such a thing as organic church union can be brought about, it 
would ask the other churches maintaining the threefold order of the min- 
istry and the episcopal succession carefully to consider the policy outlined 
above, which it offers as its contribution towards the solution of the per- 
plexing problem of ' ' orders. ' ' 

If eventually one uniform ministry should be established in the 
church of Christ in the United States, and if in view of its historicity, 
episcopal ordination should be accepted as an orderly and solemn method 


of setting 'men apart for the sacred office, would not the polity above set 
forth help to solve the problems of the transition period? This would 
disturb no existing method of governmental church administration, would 
prevent all possibility of the assumption of hierarchial authority, and 
would ecclesiastically acknowledge the validity of all ministerial functions 
hitherto performed as the civil law does and as we all do practically. 
Positively, it would establish a uniform ministry, the validity and canon- 
icity of which all could acknowledge. 

From the point of view of the Moravian Church, the only obstacles in 
the way of organic church union are purely of an administrative character. 
One would regret the obliteration of historic origins and developments and 
the gradual disappearance of loved customs, which would persist in local 
congregations, but eventually become obsolete. But in a united church of 
Christ, these are all non-essentials, and the building up of the actual king- 
dom of Christ is not dependent upon them. 

The Moravian Church has not as yet considered any plan of organic 
union officially in any body having adequate jurisdiction, so it cannot pre- 
sent any formulated plan. 

Organic church union cannot be brought about at one stroke. It will 
have to depend primarily upon a common but genuine religious experience. 
It must then be a matter of growth and development. 

A beginning, must, however be made and a tentative plan must , be 
tested and tried out. It would be a mistake to attempt the formulation 
of a constitution providing for all details. As a beginning little more can 
be attempted than the setting up of fundamental and underlying princi- 
ples. But, if there is to be real organic union, there must be a delegation 
of authority to sotae body, which can really carry out into practical action 
the logical results of the accepted principles. There would have to be some 
central assembly, which really represents the entire church and which has 
the right and authority to make its enactments effective. 

As we are considering the organic union of the Evangelical churches 
of the United States, the most natural thing is to have our own Federal 
government as the model. 

As a beginning, until the one evangelical church of Christ in the 
United States could develop normally and naturally until it could, so to 
speak, find itself, it would almost necessarily have to be a federated church. 
This would, however, differ from the present Federal Council of the 
Churches of Christ in America, in that its highest judicatory would have 
to be a body having real jurisdiction and real authority. 

This body, under existing circumstances, would almost have to consist 
of two houses. In the lower house, representation would be based upon 
the communicant membership of the existing separate churches. But, 
until the existing churches had really, by natural and normal development 
been fused into one church, there would have to be an upper house to pass 
finally on the legislation, measures and enactments of the lower house, 
in which all the separate churches entering into the federation would have 
equal representation, after the model of our national senate. That would 


safeguard the interests of the smaller churches, until a- complete fusion 
and amalgamation of the churches had taken place. 

These are only bare outlines, but at this preliminary conference it 
would be presumptuous to proceed further. Possibly even these sugges- 
tions are too specific and definite, for there are certain objections to a 
bicameral body. 

May the Great Head of the Church, our divine Lord and Master, Je- 
sus, the Christ, our Eedeemer and Saviour, by His divine spirit, Himself 
bring about that consummation, which He Himself has in mind, so that His 
prayer, that we may all be one, as He and the Father are one, may be ful- 
filled in the way He Himself would have it fulfilled. 

The Provincial-Elders '-Conference, 

(Executive Board) 
Of the Moravian Church in America, 
(Northern Province) 
Charles L. Moen'ch, President, 
Paul de Schweinitz, Vice-President 

and Treasurer, 
K. A. Mueller, Vice-President, 
John S. Eomig, Secretary. 



By Eev. Cornelius Woelfkin, D.D. 

The executive committee of the Northern Baptist Convention which acts 
ad interim between the annual sessions of the convention have requested 
the members of our Commission on Faith and Order to respond to your 
courteous invitation. 

The proposition to consider organic church union has not as yet been 
introduced at any of our denominational conferences. Since we have no 
formulated sentiment, much less a definite policy, with respect to a matter 
so recently over the horizon, it is impossible for us to make any statement 
which would represent the attitude of the Baptist churches upon this sub- 

Our appointment as a commission does not carry with it any right to 
speak for or commit the denomination to any position or line of proce- 
dure on this or any other proposition involving questions of faith or auton- 
omy. Our organization is such that we have no federal or central body 
which can act or legislate for our more than ten thousand Baptist churches, 
all of which maintain the right to independent existence and free action. 
Our conventions are bodies in which we seek to focus our denominational 
consciousness, but in their relation to the churches they are only advisory 
with reference to such questions for which we are now gathered in con- 


The traditions of the Baptist churches have hitherto laid their em- 
phasis upon a spiritual union while holding as a cardinal tenet the inde- 
pendency of the separate churches. In the primary and essential elements 
of the Christian faith and the verities of spiritual experiences we are one 
with the evangelical bodies of the church of God. We believe that we are 
together heirs to the great heritages which God has vouchsafed to the uni- 
versal church and consequently we are sympathetic toward any movement 
which seeks a better understanding of one another and a more effective co- 
operation in bringing in the kingdom, of God. 

While speaking only for ourselves as a Committee and not for the de- 
nomination, we think we can reflect the general sentiment among Baptists 
upon this subject. We have many individual members who are persuaded 
that the next step in the advance of the church is in the direction of or- 
ganic church union. The main body of our churches on the other hand are 
waiting for further developments in the hope for divine guidance. In 
common with all denominations we desire to preserve the historic value of 
our traditions and those distinctive positions and usages which we believe 
have been a contribution to the church and the world. We are desirous 
of cultivating an open-minded attitude upon all propositions looking to- 
ward a closer and more effective cooperation in our common task. We 
have no desire to prove reactionary or to lose the divine leading with ref- 
erence to the Holy Spirit's movements in this great and new day. Though 
our committee cannot commit the denomination in this conference we are 
here to listen sympathetically, to think earnestly and work hopefully with 
you toward any end that will promote the hastening and establishment of 
our Lord's kingdom on the earth. We will report tlie findings of the confer- 
ence to our churches through all the agencies which are open to us. With 
this explanation we desire to be given a place in your deliberations as in- 
timate as the circumstances of the situation will permit. 



By Prof. Williston Walker, D.D. 

The Congregational churches of the United States, through delegates duly 
appointed by the executive committee of their National Council, and that 
Council's commission on unity, cordially respond to the call of the Gen- 
eral Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. to take 
part in a council looking towards an organic union of American evan- 
gelical Christianity. They thus heartily pledge their cooperation in so 
noble and imperative an undertaking because they deem the time ripe 
for this great advance of the kingdom of God among us. The evil of our 
multitudinous divisions was never more apparent than now when the over- 
throw of old tyrannies gives promise of a new world and the liberated 
forces of democracy need to be shaped and guided by the mind of Christ. 
They believe also that, under the leading of the Spirit of the God, the 


development of American Christianity during the last generation has brought 
us to the place where such unity lies within reach. Without sacrifice of 
conviction or loss of inherited values, we can merge our separate in- 
terests in a single body. In so doing we shall not be creating a patchwork 
of half-hearted concessions but instead shall register in outward unity 
what is already an inner fact. A few illustrations of our movement to- 
ward conimon ground may be named as typical of all. 

Practically every Protestant body has abandoned the idea that its 
form of faith and order is minutely presented in the New Testament. That 
rule of the belief and government of the church is generally looked upon 
as giving broad regulative principles rather than a detailed prescription. 
We are thus delivered from the necessity of seeking unity by a process 
in which one communion absorbs the others. 

There has been a general surrender of the idea that a church must 
have an elaborate creedal basis. The historic creeds need not be repu- 
diated. They are honored monuments of faith of our fathers and wit- 
nesses to the apprehension of Christianity of those in spiritual succession 
to whom we gladly stand. But most Protestants are satisfied, as a pres- 
ent practical test of communion, with a creed which embraces only the 
central affirmations of the Christian faith. We are thus delivered from 
the necessity of demanding that our brother accept all our philosophy 
of the universe. 

The experiences of life and! work under essentially identical conditions 
of American religious life, and in growing cooperation between various 
communions, have wrought changes in the methods and spirit of every 
Christian body with the result that we are vastly nearer a comfmon type 
than we were a generation ago. 

All these tendencies have been emphasized by the world war. All 
classes, ages, tastes, races and creeds within our nation have been drawn 
together by the common experience of toil and sacrifice for high aims. 

Broadly speaking, the Christian bodies in our nation may be classed 
in two great groups. One may be called the independent. Its stress is 
upon the preacher's message rather than on ritual or sacrament, upon the 
authority of the Bible rather than on an official creed, upon individual 
responsibility rather than corporate solidarity, upon the local congregation 
rather than the church at large. Its watchwords have been liberty, de- 
mocracy and spirituality. The other great group may be called the cor- 
porate. Here, in varying degrees, ritual and sacrament are emphasized, 
historic continuity cherished, creedal tests are maintained, at least for of- 
fice-bearers, individual initiative isi less required and the local church takes 
its form and finds its guidance through the will of the church at large. 

Both types have shared abundantly in the blessing of God. Neither 
can justly say to the other that it has been more used by the divine Master 
whose servants all the churches are. Each group has shown its apprecia- 
tion of the other by increasingly borrowing its elements of strength. 
The independent group, during the past generation, has been rapidly de- 
veloping organs for united action through councils, conventions and mis- 


sionary societies, in which the local churches act through representatives. 
In its turn, the corporate group has allowed increasing freedom to the 
local congregation in adaptation to the peculiarities of its field service, 
the selection of its ministry and the control of its affairs. Before our 
eyes are the patent facts that the independent group is steadily working 
towards order, cohesion and responsibile oversight, and that the corporate 
group is* moving towards) creedal simplicity, limitation of control by bodies 
of oversight and a wider liberty for the local congregation and the 
individual believer. 

The conclusion to which these facts irresistibly lead is that the general 
mind of American Protestants recognizes not only that each of these 
great groups has a contribution to make to organized Christianity, but 
that it is possible for each to incorporate within itself the values while 
escaping the defects of the other. This means the possibility of a united 
American Christianity, having a large freedom for the local congregation 
combined with appropriate organs and responsible leadership for united 
action in the field of common responsibilities. To achieve this is the 
task to which we are summoned by the conditions of the hour. 

The attainment of such an end will carry us to the core of the ex- 
isting disunity. The sacraments instituted by Christ will be administered 
by each local church in the mode of its selection but with full agreement 
that the mode of each sister church shall have complete recognition and 
that all disciples of Christ shall be equally welcome to their privileges. 
In like way entrance to the Christian ministry would be under definite, 
orderly and responsible conditions and the standing of a minister thus 
authenticated would be unquestioned throughout the body. 

The working out of the detail of a plan of organization and procedure, 
embodying the view of the case above expressed, would be of necessity 
a matter for much labor and prayer. But that it lies within the power 
of the evangelical forces of America we cannot doubt. We are prepared 
to join with our brethren of other cc/mmunions in undertaking the task 
and endeavoring, with earnest and unselfish purpose, to reach the goal of 
a vital unity in the work and worship of the church of Christ. 



By Bushop Ethelbert Talbot, D.D. 

I wish emphatically at the very beginning of this statement to disclaim 
utterly any thought or intention of bringing over to the Episcopal Church 
the non-episcopal churches here represented. My object is simply to pre- 
sent some reasonable basis, not of bringing over, but of bringing together 
those of us who are now separated in the matter of organic union. 

You are all familiar with the movement which has been initiated 
in our country by the Episcopal Church and has been widely taken up by 
the Christian churches in the United States to prepare for a world-wide 


conference on Faith and Order with a view of promoting the visible 
unity of the body of Christ on earth. 

In 1886, at our General Convention, held in Chicago, the House of 
Bishops put forth a declaration concerning the terms which they dedmed 
to be a sufficient basis for the reunion of Christendom and this declara- 
tion was reaffirmed two years later by the Conference of Bishops of the 
Anglican Communion held at Lambeth Palace, England. This declaration 
is summarized under four heads as follows: 

1. The Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament as containing 
all things necessary to salvation, and as being the rule and ultimate 
standard of faith. 

2. The Apostles' Creed as the baptismal symbol; and the Nicene 
Creed as a sufficient statement of the Christian faith. 

3. The two sacraments ordained by Christ Himself, Baptism and the 
Supper of the Lord ministered with unfailing use of Christ's words of 
institution, and of the elements ordained by Him. 

4. The Historic Episcopate, locally adapted in the methods of its 
administration to the varying needs of the nations and peoples called of 
God into the unity of His church. 

Quite recently in response to an appeal from those who are cooperat- 
ing in America to prepare for the holding of the proposed world-wide 
conference on Faith and Order, a committee was appointed in England 
by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, and by the commissions of 
the Free churches, to promote the same movement there. This resulted 
in the holding of a very important joint conference' which has already 
issued two reports. 

The second interim report issued by this joint conference, after mature 
and prolonged consideration, deserves special 'mention on such an occasion 
as thisi In my humble judgment it registers a decided advance over 
Anything achieved on this side of the water in the solving of the problem 
of organic union. The report is signed by such distinguished and repre- 
sentative leaders of religious thought in England that I deem it important 
to refer to their conclusions and to adopt the'm substantially as my own.* 

We are here to-day to explore the ground in order to discover the 
best ways of approach to the questions to be considered and those which 
seem most promising and hopeful. 

In all their discussions, they were guided by two convictions from 
which they could not escape. 

1. It is the purpose of our Lord that believers in Him should be 
one visible society and this unity is essential to the purpose of Christ 
for His church and for its effective witness and work in the world. The 
conflict among Christian nations (recently ended) has brought home to 

*1. Bath and Wells, Rt. Rev. Geo. Wyndham Kenwin, D.D., Chairman; 
2. Winchester, Rt. Rev. Edward S. Talbot, D.D. ; 3. Oxford, Rt. Rev. Charles Gore, 
D.D.; 4. W. T. Davison; 5. A. E. Garvie; 6. H. Iy. Gouge; 7. I. Scott Udgett; 
8. W. B. Selbie; o. J. H. Shakspeare ; 10. Eugene Stock; 11. William Temple; 
12. Tissington Tatlow (Hon. Sec.) ; 13. H. G. Wood. 

March, 1918 (see giving Church of May 18, 1918). 


them with a greater poignancy the disastrous results of the divisions 
which prevail among Christians inasmuch as these have hindered that 
growth of mutual understanding which it should be the function of the 
church to foster, and because a church which is itself divided cannot 
speak effectively to a divided world. 

2. The visible unity of believers which answers to our Lord's pur- 
pose must have its source and sanction, not in any human arrangements 
but in the will of the one Father, manifested in the Son and effected 
through the operation of the Spirit ; and it must express and maintain 
the fellowship of His people with one another in Him. Thus the visible 
unity of the body of Christ is not adequately expressed in the cooperation 
of Christian churches for moral influence and social service, though such 
cooperation might, with great advantage, be carried much further than it 
is at present; it could only be fully realized through community of wor- 
ship, faith, and order, including comfmon participation in the Lord's 
Supper. This would be quite compatible with a rich diversity in life and 

3. In suggesting the conditions under which this visible unity might 
be realized, we desire to set aside for the present the abstract discussion 
of the origin of the episcopate historically, or its authority doctrinally, 
and to secure for that discussion, when it comes, as it must come, at the 
conference itself, an atmosphere congenial, not to controversy, but to 

This can be done only by facing the actual situation, in order to dis- 
cover if any practical proposals can be made that will bring the episcopal 
and non-episcopal communions nearer to one another. 

Further, the proposals are offered, not as a basis for immediate 
action, but for the sympathetic and generous consideration of all churches. 

4. The first fact they agreed to acknowledge is that the position of 
episcopacy in the greater part of Christendom, as the recognized organ 
of the unity and continuity of the church is such, that the members of 
the episcopal churches ought not to be expected to abandon it, in assent- 
ing to any basis of reunion. 

5. The second fact which they agreed to acknowledge is that there 
are a number of Christian churches, not accepting the episcopal order, 
which have been used, by the Holy Spirit in His work of enlightening the 
world, converting sinners, and perfecting saints. They came into being 
through reaction from grave abuses in the church, at the tftne of their 
origin, and they were led, in response to fresh apprehensions of divine 
truth, to give expression to certain types of Christian experience, aspira- 
tion and fellowship, and to secure rights of Christian people which had 
been neglected or denied. 

In view of these facts, if the visible unity, so much desired, within 
the church, and so necessary for the testimony and influence of the church 
in the world, is ever to be realized, it is important that the episcopal 
and non-episcopal communions shall approach one another, not by the 
method of human compromise, but in correspondence with God's own way 


of reconciling differences in Christ Jesus. What we desire to see is, not 
grudging concession, but a willing acceptance for the common enrich- 
ment of the united church of the wealth distinctive of each. 

Looking as frankly and as widely as possible at the whole situation, 
they desire, with a due sense of responsibility, to submit for the serious 
consideration of all the parts of a divided Christendom what seems to them 
the necessary conditions of any possibility of reunion. 

1. The continuity with the historical episcopate should be effectively 

2. In order that the rights and responsibilities of the whole Christian 
community in the government of the church may be adequately recognized, 
the episcopate should reassume a constitutional form, both as regards 
the method of the election of the bishop, as by the clergy and the people, 
and the method of government after election. Moreover it was perhaps 
necessary that they should call to mind that such was the primitive ideal 
and practice of episcopacy, and it so remains in many episcopal com- 
munions to-day, as for instance among ourselves here in America. 

3. The acceptance of the fact of episcopacy, and not any theory as 
to its character, should be all that is asked for. We think that this may 
be more easily taken for granted as the acceptance of any such theory 
is not now required of ministers of the Church of England. It would 
no doubt be necessary, before any arrangement for corporate reunion 
could be made, to discuss the exact functions which it may be agreed to 
recognize as belonging to the episcopate, but we think this can be left 
to the future. 

4. The acceptance of the fact of episcopacy on these terms should 
not involve any Christian community in the necessity of disowning its 
past, but should enable all to maintain the continuity of their witness 
and influence as heirs and trustees of types of Christian thought, life 
and order, not only of value to themselves, but of value to the church 
as a whole. Accordingly they hope and desire that each of these com- 
munions would bring its own distinctive contribution, not only to the 
common life of the church, but also to its methods of organization, and 
that all that is true in the experience and testimony of the uniting com- 
munions would be conserved to the church. 

Within such a recovered unity, they would agree in claiming that 
the legitimate freedom of prophetic ministry (or preaching) should be 
carefully preserved; and in anticipating that many customs and institu- 
tions which have been developed in separate communities may be preserved 
within the larger unity of which they have come to form a part. 

I may add further that these brethren have carefully avoided any 
discussion of the merits of any polity, or any advocacy of one form, in 
preference to another. All they have attempted is to show how reunion 
might be brought about, the conditions of the existing churches, and the 
convictions held regarding these questions by their members, being what 
they are. As they are persuaded that it is on these lines and these alone 
that the subject can be approached with any prospect of any measure of 


agreement, they earnestly ask the members of the churches to which they 
respectively belong to examine carefully their conclusions and the facts 
on which they are based, and to give them all the weight that they deserve. 

Finally they state that in putting forward these proposals, they do 
so because it must be felt by all good and earnest Christians as an in- 
tolerable burden to find themselves permanently separated in respect of 
religious worship and communion from those in whose characters and lives 
they recognize the surest evidences of the indwelling spirit; and because, 
as becomes increasingly evident, it is only as the one body, praying, taking 
counsel, and acting together, that the church can hope to appeal to men 
as the body of Christ, that is Christ's visible organ and instrument in 
the world in which the spirit of brotherhood and of love as wide as hu- 
manity finds effective expression.. 

Something must be done soon to heal the unhappy divisions which 
mar and weaken the witness of the church for Christ to-day. I a)m per- 
suaded that no cause is dearer to the heart of our Saviour than that 
His disciples shall be one body, that the world may believe that He 
was sent by the Father. I am thankful that through God's spirit so 
deep and widespread an interest has been awakened in His church in be- 
half of organic union. The war, happily just ended, has taught us to 
think hereafter, no longer in terms of the nation, but of the world. Our 
great struggle for life and liberty has brought us nearer together than 
ever before as Christian men. Our people have become sick and tired 
of our conflicting and confusing differences with their economic waste 
and their unnecessary friction. Our Missions in heathen lands are appeal- 
ing to us to be reconciled to each other and to give them a church with 
a united front. If we ministers do not act, our people will feel constrained 
to take the initiative. Can we not, while retaining, in the freedom of a 
liberal catholicity the essential truths for which we stand, unite on some 
broad and well tried platform? As the wise men of old each brought 
his distinctive gift, whether of gold, frankincense or myrrh, and laid it 
at the feet of the Master in the fulness of his heart's adoration, can 
we not unite in a larger unity than we have yet achieved by each church 
making its distinctive contribution without compromise or sacrifice of 
any cherished principle. 

It was in the breaking of the bread that the disciples at Emmaus 
recognized their Master. May God bring us into the same fellowship so 
that our hearts may burn within us, as He reveals to us, all united in 
Him, the depth and the reality of His incarnate life. 



By Bishop John W. Hamilton, D.D. 

There has been no greater achievement of the war so far as this 
country is concerned than the solidarity of the American people — that 


organic union of the AJmerican spirit, sentiment and endeavor that has 
made of us all a nation of patriots from coast to coast, the lakes to the 
gulf and in all our islands of the seas. It was not safe not to be in 
this union; men had to join; it was simply a question of organic union 
or mandamus imprisonment. War, death and taxes take the solitary 
out of us in short measure. 

But we are told the church's business is quite another matter. I 
know how it is and in most cases why it is. Nevertheless, the influence 
of this patriotic spirit of union over all is still in the air and must stay 
in the air long after President Wilson comes back and long after military 
occupancy has kept General Pershing and tens of thousands of our soldiers 
for a decade, perhaps a generation, somewhere over the seas. It is only 
a reflective movement of the national unification spirit that brings us here. 

No matter what we do here as the guests of the Presbyterian General 
Assembly and the church of the twice born in this City, the organic union 
of church members is bound to come. Nay, it has already come. I know 
whereof I affirm. As founder of the First People's Church, I received 
into the membership persons from every communion of which I had ever 
heard; Congregationalists, Baptists, hard-shell and soft, (Calvinist Baptists 
and Free Will Baptists) ; Presbyterians, Old School and New School; Scotch 
Presbyterians and Covenanters, Episcopalians, Swedenborgians, Universal- 
ists, Unitarians, Greeks and Russians and Roman Catholics. The com- 
municants from all these extra-lateral denominations far outnumbered the 
native born Methodists who were also communicants with them. And the 
membership was an organic union, too, for all these members had come 
in over the old-fashioned Methodist mourner's bench or having the same 
Pentecostal spirit. 

But some form of union of the societies or churches, as such, is sure 
to come. I speak so confidently, I can hear you ask, how and when? Well 
if the me'mbers of these respective communions all have certificates of 
membership that are worth anything they will find that they will work 
like paid-up life insurance policies. If the insurance does not accrue 
and come due here, as on the short or long endowment plan, it will be 
paid some time, somehow, somewhere, when the members have to die to 
win. Win at the last they will and the winning will then hold over. For, 
of that church union and peace there shall be no end. That is assuming, 
of course, that there is only one church beyond the veil. On that presump- 
tion there should be only one here. The grave is no dividing line. Spir- 
itual organisms are not severed by the pick and shovel. Do any of us 
believe that there is more than one invisible church here? If not, why 
are we not in it? If we are all members of it, why do we have to keep 
the books of registration at so great expense and with so much friction 
in different buildings. The salaries of the sextons would send enough mis- 
sionaries into Germany, Austria, Turkey and Bulgaria to educate by tui- 
tion, ignition and contrition the insane and suicidal notions out of the 
heads of these confessed assassins and love them into being our friends. 
And they would do it sooner than would a world league of other nations 


with a hundred li Bertha guns," and the Krupp factory still working to 
keep the police force in munitions. 

But there are uses for a unified Protestant church at home. My 
friends are frequently writing to me, knowing that I live in Washington, 
to inquire if the situation there is not such as to make me think that we 
will soon have to have another Protestant Reformation. I was asked since 
coming to this conference if I didn't really think there was a probability 
of the Vatican being removed to Washington. Possibly such an extreme 
occasion may be needed to unify the Protestant churches for the emergency. 
Concerning such an emergency, permit me to say that while I am ready 
to resist with all possible determination and adequate national authority 
and equipment the political encroachment upon our free institutions by 
any despotic ecclesiarch with an effete ecclesiolatry, I have not lost faith 
in the enlightening and regenerating power of the Holy Spirit of truth 
backed by a living, loving and valiant ministry going forth weeping and 
bearing precious seed to meet and withstand the belated prejudices and 
apocryphal traditions of the elders. Sympathy, too, yet rules the world. 
So, as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to them that are 
in Rome also, whether in Italy or America, for, I am not ashamed of the 
gospel of Christ; for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one 
that believeth. 

Then there is the burning, blazing trouble of the neglected, discon- 
tented revolutionary elements in our streets. If the Bolsheviki harpies of 
Asia and Europe are to flee from the presence of the military forces, which 
are bound to suppress them over there, and come to our shores further 
to aggravate and aggregate discontentment here, it must be the church 
of one faith, one Lord, one baptism — all the Christian churches in one 
which in the end must suppress them here, if permanently by process 
of evolution, then not by might but by my Spirit saith the Lord. 

Now to be frank with you to-day, while I am here to contribute per- 
sonally to the utmost of my ability to forward the good work of our 
genial, hospitable and worthily ambitious hosts in bringing on the millen- 
nial achievement of making one great church out of the fragments which 
we severally represent, I am only stating what we are saying to each 
other when two or three of us are met together, before we pray or after; 
it is this: "My denomination is not ready yet to go into solution with 
fifty more or less other churches so as to lose its integrity or identity, 
notwithstanding it may be or is understood to be the lofty ideal expressed 
in the Lord's last prayer for His disciples." 

Nevertheless, I am fully persuaded that this conference is a com- 
mendable undertaking, which, if it did nothing more has made us know 
each other better and love each other more. It will do more, has already 
done more. I have heard representatives of more than one denomination 
set forth such agreements with some of us here as to produee a way at 
once for our unification with them, and so sincerely outspoken, their 
unification of soul, body and spirit with us. This I believe to be the 
providential order of the organic union. When two or more begin the 


movement others will follow. Some must be the example for others. 
Moreover, I discover in the spirit and doctrine of all the addresses, ground 
for the hope that we can secure as a first step to the union, a closer and 
more helpful bond of fellowship by way of federation. I am not pre- 
pared to outline a plan, but to suggest that our Presbyterian brothers 
take courage of this conference and arrange for further interdenomina- 
tional deliberation in council to promote the federation of all the churches, 
and provoke, if need be, organic union of some of such as can influence 
their several communities to become pioneers in the work of conforming to 
the excellent, national spirit of unity which now inspires the whole country. 

You want to know now what the Methodist Episcopal Church will 
do: I am compelled to say those of us who are here can only speak each 
for himself. The nucleus of our delegation was appointed first as a com- 
mission to confer with like commissions from other churches in the in- 
terest of the world conference on Faith and Order. While the object of 
that conference is to have something in common with this one, it will 
deal with more communions at arm's length and will not be confined to the 
close quarters and close brotherhood of this movement. 

I may set forth some features of our denominational spirit and dis- 
position which offer at least encouragement for closer relation with all the 
other Protestant bodies. 

You know, I presume, that we came into this world by way of ex- 
communication. Our name was given us in derision. John Wesley had 
no thought of founding a church separate from the English establishment. 
He lived and died, so far as his own action was concerned, a member of 
the Church of England. When he coined the expression, "The world is 
my parish' ' there was no arrogance in the claim. He simply declared 
that his mission was to go into existing co'mmunions, recover their spirit 
and life by preaching the reviving and revitalizing gospel. As he was 
forbidden such ministry in his own church and was driven forth from 
its houses of worship into the fields, his societies, for such he designated 
them, grew, providentially but at first into some kind of imperfect care- 
taking; the outcome of the Wesleyan connection was of slow growth as a 
separate organization. Mr. Wesley's definition of the Methodists which 
was so concise and significant discriminated distinctly from any denomina- 
tional formation. We have carried his definition in our book of Discipline 
through all the years as have the Wesleyans in England. It was this: 
"The Methodists are a company of persons having the form and seeking 
the power of godliness." The only stipulation for membership in his 
societies was "A desire to flee from the wrath to come and to be saved." 
The breadth of his fellowship was declared to be as follows: "If thy 
heart is as my heart, give me thy hand." 

All branches of Methodism have adopted his creed and embraced his 
spirit in their relation to other Christian churches. 

As his work grew up within the Church of England he accepted the 


fundamental teaching of that church, modifying somewhat and reducing 
the number of the Thirty- Nine Articles. He was insistent on having his 
preachers hold fast to the deity of Jesus Christ, the availability of His 
atonement, the conversion of believers, the witness of the Spirit and the 
resurrection of the dead. 

We have reduced the Thirty-Nine Articles to twenty-five, and there 
are some among us who think that some of them are almost obsolete. 
There is nothing in our creed that would exclude most of the Protestant 
churches from our fellowship. We can give our Baptist brethren all 
the water they want and still retain enough for pouring and sprinkling. 
If our aggressive friends who have been having such rapid growth, the 
Disciples of Christ, will let us use a little, I say a very little, water, when 
we dedicate our children, we will have no words with them. We are ready 
now to let our Moravian brethren take us in their arms, or if they will 
allow us, reverse the action for the debt we owe them for acting as the 
god-father of John Wesley. As to our neighbors the Friends, they make 
splendid Methodists, a little subdued of course. A good brother of their 
communion once asked me, in this city, if I knew the difference between 
a Quaker and a Methodist. I replied that I did not know that they had 
any difference. He said, "Yes, there is quite a difference. A Quaker/' 
said he, "is just a plain, inoffensive, every day Quaker, but a Methodist 
is an earth-quaker. " 

There is one very important reason why you should not insist upon 
our going into this union with you just now. We are in the business 
of organic union among ourselves. You have heard, probably, of the 
argument of the two colored preachers as to which was the "biggest 
church"— the Methodist or the Baptist. The Methodist brother was quite 
stalwart in the defense of his church but the Baptist brother completely 
silenced him by saying he knew the Baptist was "biggest" because they 
had seventeen divisions of their church and there were only sixteen of the 
Methodists. We are engaged at this time in trying to get these sixteen 
divisions together. If you will, just wait a little and we will speak with 
you later. We are really doing something as Methodists the world over 
as we are looking in the New Testament direction. A few years ago all 
branches of Wesleyans in Canada came together, flowing freely as the 
running brooks, in one Methodism ; then later three very sizeable Wesleyan 
bodies were united in Great Britain; and in this calendar year the two 
largest bodies of Methodists in England, the original Wesleyans and the 
Primitives, are courting in fine fashion and we may expect the announce- 
ment of their engagement any day. The President of the Primitive con- 
ference, one of the most eloquent preachers in England, with the Bishop 
of Oxford, has just concluded an itinerant mission in this country seeking 
to promote a livelier spirit of internationalism. The Methodist Episcopal 
Church and the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, have been and are 
now arranging appointments to drink toasts to the health of each other. 
If the brother in black could turn white within a year or two, these two 


great churches in one general conference could be drinking to the health 
of all your churches represented here. Following the coalition of the 
Methodists, which has already taken place, we have an indication of what 
may happen when we have "16 to 1" In Canada and Australia the 
Methodists and Presbyterians are working jointly on an act of incorpora- 
tion of a merger by which they intend to increase both their capital and 
surplus. A similar movement will not be far in the distance here. 

The only official way the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church 
can get the binding consent of the Methodist Episcopal Church to let go 
and drop by way of the merger into this world-wide communion is for the 
Assembly to send their delegates to the next session of the law-making 
body for initiating legislation — the General Conference. This supreme 
authority brings together once in four years its nearly one thousand 
members from over all the earth. The delegates will be given a chance to 
state the ease to the conference. After poring over the business possibly 
through the thirty days of the session, the conference will send its con- 
sent down to the annual conferences of both preachers and laymen just 
as the Federal Congress sends amendments to the Constitution to the 
several states, for adoption. The amendment will then come back to the 
General Conference and the thing will be done. It is just as easy as that. 
Until then it will be well to remember that cooperation is an aeroplane 
in the employ of both federation and organic union. If both were not 
so near heaven the churches would take the journey with less trepidation. 

I would not have you think that we have nothing we would give up 
by way of concession to go into the union. We be brethren. But we 
are just as certain as you can be that we are a Scriptural church, with a 
valid and authorized ministry, with bishops divinely ordained, having the 
same right to administer the sacraments that any other ministry can claim. 
We may not be able to find our exact form of church government in the 
New Testament, as we are sure that the comknunicants of any other 
church cannot find theirs given there. But, if you will hunt a bit you 
will find the secret of our inspiration is there, just the same as the sources of 
all of your churches are to be found there. There are occasions when 
literal interpretation should give way to spiritual. I may call attention 
again to the controversy between colored brothers for illustration. The 
Baptist brother had declared there was no foundation in the Scriptures for 
the Methodist Church; but, ^for ours," he said, "There is John the Bap- 
tist. Now where do you find the Methodist mentioned anywhere in the 
Bible ? ' ' The Methodist brother replied, l ' You don 't read your Bible clear 
through." Turning to Revelation, he read, ct 'The first foundation was 
jasper, the second was sapphire, the third chalcedony, the fourth emerald' 
and so on 'the eleventh jacinth, and the twelfth a Methodist. ' " (amethyst) 
' ' I give it up, ' ' said the Baptist, ' ' I never knew before it was in there. ' ' 

While you are waiting, I am sure you will find the shortest way to 
make an end of this whole matter is to come over and join us. 




B<y Rev. Rufus W. Miller, D.D. 

The Reformed Church in the United States, with a membership of 
330,155 and adherents representing altogether three-quarters to a million 
people, with 1785 congregations and 1279 ordained ministers, traces its 
history to the Reformation of the sixteenth century, with Ulrich Zwingli 
as its founder in Switzerland, and to the Heidelberg catechism as repre- 
senting its system of doctrine published in 1563. 

Its membership, in the early history of this country, was Swiss, 
French and German. Its organization came through the classis of the 
Reformed Church of Holland and missionaries sent by them to this coun- 
try. Its form of government is Presbyterian or Republican. It is a 
semi-liturgical church, giving full freedom in forms of worship. In its 
origin the Reformed Church incarnated the spirit of unity and efforts 
towards union. 

Ulrich Zwingli, a Swiss reformer, one of the founders of the Re- 
formed Church, recognized the sin of schism and in the early days of the 
Reformation, when the individualism and liberty of Protestantism 
wasted themselves in riotous extravagance, Zwingli, almost alone, stood 
for peace and union. He stood for a league of concord as would have 
bound all Europe together for advancing the interests of the kingdom. 
In this way he wished to provide for the fullest freedom of the individ- 
ual while uniting them together as he said "by the spiritual bond of 
a common faith; of a common submission to the Gospel, embraced with 
a pure mind and carried out in practice; satisfying the understanding 
and contenting the heart; one in its (dm of worship of God; diverse in 
its mode according to the usage and wants of the country, tolerating 
philosophical as little as dogmatical dictators; repudiating alike the 
propaganda and Jesuits; a league whose members are not exclusive like 
the Jews, but helpful like Christians. ' ' 

In the historic Marburg conference, the clean-cut figure of Zwingli 
as a man of union and peace, appears in alpine proportions. He sec- 
onded the efforts of Prince Philip of Hesse and rallied all the Swiss 
reformers to strenuous efforts in order to win the Wittenbergers; and 
when Luther was unwilling to make the slightest concession, Zwingli 
came forward and said: "Let us confess to the world the points in 
which we agree and as for the rest, let us treat each other as breth- 
ren. " Zwingli, his eyes swimming in tears, feeling that the crucial 
moment had come, approached Luther, holding out his brotherly hand. 
It was one of the sublime moments of the Reformation, if not of all 
Protestant Christianity. Some of the spectators of this great scene 
realized with the profoundest emotion the significance of the occasion 
and watched with a deathlike stillness for the outcome of the whole 


Luther failed. The proffered hand of love was rejected. We do not 
question his sincerity but perhaps it was in the spirit of prophecy he 
said: "You have a different spirit from ours. " The Heidelberg cate- 
chism was sent forth as an olive branch of peace. It breathes the devo- 
tion of a Christian heart and is irenic in its tone. 

The history of the Eeformed Church in this country has been con- 
sistently toward Christian unity. It has made several efforts for a 
federal or an organic union with the sister Reformed Church in America. 
It has the proud distinction of having brought to this country and hav- 
ing in its theological seminary for twenty years, the great prophet and 
pioneer of Christian unity — the late Dr. Philip Schaff. It has associ- 
ated itself with the Alliance of the Reformed Churches in the World 
Holding the Presbyterian System. "It is, by constitutional enactment, 
a member of the Council of the Reformed Church in America Holding the 
Presbyterian System, a federated body of five of the Presbyterian and 
Reformed Churches of this country, and it has been loyal in its rela- 
tions to the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America. 

The dominant theology of the Reformed Church has been Christo- 
eentric, and in the creed of Christ is there not the true basis for the 
future union of Christendom? It believes, with Dr. Philip Schaff, 
that "heresy is an error, intolerance a sin, persecution a crime. " 
The Reformed Church in the United States accepts the now familiar 
words: "Not compromise, but comprehension; not uniformity, but un- 
ion. " The Reformed Church has approved, in its highest judicatory, 
the sentiment: "We believe it to be all-important that we continue 
looking forward and to keep the ideal and hope of a closer federated 
union of Christendom before us and our people. In order to do this we 
instruct our ministers, through our synods and classes, to preach fre- 
quently on the purpose of Christian fellowship and cooperation in the 
great moral issues of life as they affect us in our individual and social 
relations and to urge our people to work with zeal to this end. ' ' 

The General Synod, representing the entire Reformed Church, has 
a permanent commission on closer relations and church union which has 
authority to receive overtures and proposals from other church bodies 
with reference to federal or organic union and this commission is charged 
with authority to submit plans and such communications to the General 
Synod from time to time. 

The attitude of the Reformed Church on the subject of Christian 
unity is three-fold. 

FIRST: It places a high value upon and desires to maintain and 
continue its membership in the Federal Council of the Churches of 
Christ in America. The Federal Council is of the nature of a genuine 
historical development. It is the natural development of a deep sense 
of need upon the part of the Protestant Churches of America and of 
a great want upon the part of the country. Its significance lies in the 
fact that in it there is found for the first time an organ through which 
the voice of the Protestant churches of the country may be heard and 


proper effect be given to their sentiment upon all those questions, reli- 
gious and moral, democratic, social, national, international, which are 
continually demanding discussion, decision, action. 

We believe that the work of the Wartime Commission of the Fed- 
eral Council is a splendid demonstration of the value of this federated 

The Reformed Church is enthusiastically committed to the Federal 
Council and believes in giving it larger powers on the part of its con- 
stituent bodies. The Reformed Church believes that for the Protestant 
church of the United States, the important duty is to aid and cooperate in 
every way possible with the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ 
in America. It is the most helpful movement for serious Christian c«> 
operation which has yet been devised, for it unites the denominations 
through representatives with authority from the supreme judicatories of 
thirty denominations. It likewise secures the cooperation of particu- 
lar churches in a given community or state by means of state federa- 
tions, county federations, town and city federations. The Federal Coun- 
cil has accomplished more in the past ten years in creating an at- 
mosphere and in securing practical cooperation than has been accom- 
plished in perhaps 100 years past. 

SECOND: The Reformed Church, it would seem safe to say, judg- 
ing from expressions made within the last year throughout the length 
and breadth of the church, is ready for an organic union of the Presby- 
terian-Reformed family of churches. These ten or more bodies, by rea- 
son of history, polity and doctrine, are practically one and should be or- 
ganically united together. The further progress of the Federal Council 
of Churches waits upon the lessening of the number of denominations, 
and the better federation of the particular churches in a community 
likewise waits upon the union of families of churches. If we had co- 
operative Protestantism represented in the still closer federation of the 
Federal Council, with the reduction of denominations to two or three 
great families of churches, it would be possible to prevent over-lapping, 
overlooking and the great waste of resources now going on, as well as 
practical competition and weakening of the Christian church. 

In the THIRD place the attitude of the Reformed Church in the 
United States toward an organic union of the evangelical churches in 
this country, is that of the open mind. In harmony with its irenic 
history and democratic spirit, we believe that this church is ready to 
go the length with any other sister church in America and we believe 
we speak the mind of the church when we favor a delegated council of 
the churches to consider ways and means of securing organic union. 
The war has been a convincing proof that there is something fearfully 
and vitally wrong with the Christian church. It would seem as though 
the church of Jesus Christ had lost sight of her vocation in her failure 
to grasp and enforce the central truth of the kingdom of the Father 
which Jesus lived and died to reveal. Is it not for this reason that 
she, herself, has been torn into sectarian fragments and she has had 


so little power to stay the strife of social classes and has been through- 
out the centuries an apologist and sometimes the instigator of the wars 
between nations which have devastated Christendom? The church will 
have to get rid of her intolerant and divisive sectarianism and quit con- 
demning and criticising; men for differences of theological opinion — creeds. 
Too often the church has used creeds as "big sticks' ' with which to com- 
pel all men to believe what some men have believed. The new con- 
ception of what men owe to themselves and to each other which has 
been developed by the common situation and undertakings of the war 
is permeated by thei idea of SERVICE and it is upon a basis of service 
that any enduring plans for church unity and reconstruction will be 
grounded. Institutions of all kinds are being challenged to dem- 
onstrate their usefulness in the light of what this war has shown to be 
essential and not for the preservation of one nation or one class either 
within the nation or composing parts of many nations, but for the preser- 
vation of all mankind and the promotion of equal rights everywhere. 
This applies, preeminently to the Christian church which stands for the 
fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man. The tendencies arising 
out of this war have brought this conference together. Are they not the 
desire for information, the promotion of Christian education, the wish to 
serve, the willingness to cooperate? Surely, these are the tendencies at 
the foundation of such progress as the world will make during the time 
it is at the task of rehabilitating itself and placing the world upon a new 
and better footing. History teaches us that all extremes are wrong 
as related to doctrine, and the best union of the church is one of heart 
and of action. The Reformed Church would have you call to mind to- 
day the prophetic and true word of Dr. Philip Schaff, spoken in 1893 
in his paper on the "Reunion of Christendom, " the most remarkable 
document that has yet appeared from the standpoint of wealth of his- 
torical learning, clearness of statement, the spirit of love and prophetic 
vision on the subject of Christian Unity. He said: 

"Before the reunion of Christendom can be accomplished we must 
expect providential events, new Penteeosts, new reformations — as great 
as any that have gone before. The twentieth century has marvelous sur- 
prises in store for the church and the world which may surpass even 
those of the nineteenth. History now moves with telegraphic speed and 
may accomplish the work of years in a single day. " 




By Rev. R. E. Williams, D.D. 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Conference: The very name of 
our denomination indicates our belief, so that we need not take 
up your valuable time to define it. Permit me, however, to give you 


some of its history in order to make our present position more intelli- 
gent to this body. 

The Calvinistie Methodist Church came to existence in "Wales, in 
the first half of the eighteenth century, in conection with the refor- 
mation begun in Oxford, England, in 1729, when a number of earnest 
young students, among them the Wesleys and Whitfield, at a time of 
much darkness, infidelity and corruption, agreed to meet together to 
read the Greek Testament, and pray — later on visiting the prison and 
homes, to read and to pray with those who would receive them, for 
which they were called by the wits of Oxford "The Holy Club," and 
later on came to be known as "The Methodists." 

In course of time the leaders of this small band differed in their 
religious views, and in 1741 divided into two sects — the one Calvinistie, 
under the leadership of Whitfield, the other Arminian, following the 

In 1735 (a year before the ordination of Whitfield) there went to 
Oxford a young man from Trevecca, South Wales, of the name of 
Howell Harries, with the intention of taking holy orders. Having 
been recently converted, and full of zeal and enthusiasm, he returned 
to his friends in Wales, sick of the spiritual condition of the Univer- 
sity, and its surroundings. He began a reformation in his native count- 
try. Rev. Daniel Rowlands, of Llangeitho — and other clergymen of 
the Established Church joined him — among others the celebrated Rev. 
William Williams, the sweet singer of Wales. Many were converted, 
churches were organized, and a new sect was born, called The Method- 
ists. Not Calvinistie Methodists, however, as there was no need of that 
distinction, for all Methodists in Wales at the time, and for sixty years 
after, were Calvinists. Such, to a more or less degree, they are to this 
day. In mentioning the name Methodists in Wales, to ordinary people, 
it conveys but one meaning, viz., The Calvinistie Methodists. This new 
church quickly grew, and gathered strength, assuming a form much 
after the Presbyterian in faith and form of government. 

On Jan. 5, 6, 1743, the first Methodist Association in Wales was 
held at Watford, the Rev. George Whitfield, being present, was chosen 
Moderator. From the beginning this body took root and thrived in 
the Principality, until it has become one of the largest religious bodies 
there, and the only one of Welsh origin. 

As early as the latter part of the seventeenth century Welshmen 
of Calvinistie belief emigrated to this country, and affiliated them- 
selves with the Presbyterians. In the beginning of the nineteenth 
century those known as Methodists settled here, and wherever there 
were sufficient number of them together, organized themselves into 
churches, and later on into Presbyteries and Synods. To-day we have 
six of the latter, in as many different States, though one or two of 
them cover more than one State. 

In 1868 our General Assembly met for the first time, at Columbus, 


Ohio, thus making the Calvinistic Methodist (or Welsh Presbyterian) 
Church in the U. S. A. a body independent of the Calvinistic Method- 
ist Church of Wales. As a singular coincidence, in that Assembly, 
the Rev. William Roberts, D.D., of Bellevue, Scranton, Pa.— the father 
of our venerable Chairman, the Rev. William H. Roberts, D.D. — was ap- 
pointed to carry its greetings to the Presbyterian General Assembly in 
the U. S. A., the next year : and the next term he was elected its Moderator. 

This body of believers, though necessarily small, has well served its 
age and generation. With other denominations, more English in their 
origin, it has well taken care of our Welsh people in this country, fol- 
lowing them with the gospel of Jesus Christ, teaching them the principles 
of Christianity, and administering unto them all church ordinances, 
and the holy sacraments. In doing this it has helped to save many of 
our people to eternal life, to adorn them with salvation, and to keep 
them in the faith. It is our humble belief that one of the healthiest, 
and most fervent religious bodies in the States to-day is the one of 
which we are speaking. It has also helped to evangelize our country, 
and to enrich other denominations. It has raised to the pulpit men of 
strong convictions, well grounded in the faith, and strictly evangelical; 
many of whom, having been very kindly trained in the Calvinistic 
seminaries of our mother country, or those of the Presbyterian Church 
in this, have looked for wider fields of usefulness elsewhere, and are 
now filling many American pulpits, especially Presbyterian. 

Of late, as seems to be the case with all other evangelical bodies, 
the spirit of unity seems to take possession of this church. Being so 
scattered, and so far from each other, some of us are beginning to get 
tired of our isolation, and are longing for a closer relation with other 
Christian people. The spirit of sectarianism is vanishing, and that of 
federation and cooperation is taking its place. The unifying Spirit of 
the Master is beginning to move us. His significant words: ''That they 
may be one, even as we are one, " appear before our vision in larger 
type. We want to obey Him. We are beginning to think of our young 
people who cling to us in spite of many disadvantages — how best to 
meet their wants, and how best to use their talents to win the world for 
Christ. The spirit of comity, economy, and efficiency in the Master's 
service is appealing to us, and many in our midst are crying for union, 
perfectly convinced however that we have something to contribute as 
well as to gain by the act. The body most like us in form and faith — 
The Presbyterian Church in the U. S>. A. — is the one for whose favor we 
are aspiring. 

It is but fair to state, however, that all our good brethren have not 
received as clear a vision concerning this union as others have, hence 
are rather hesitant. They were quite satisfied with the first marriage, 
but are rather doubtful about the second. They are good reliable 
brethren for whom we have the greatest respect. They are men of 
whom, should they be won over, the Presbyterian body might well be 


proud. We would be most considerate of these, and would respect their 
claims. Nevertheless the spirit of unity is progressing — and the ques- 
tion is becoming a burning one. Our Presbyteries and Synods are consid- 
ering it, and if nothing unforeseen happens, it is likely our next Gen- 
eral Assembly will take it up next year. 

In the name of this humble body of believers permit me to convey 
their greeting to this the First Conference on Organic Union, with a 
prayer for its success, and for this noble spirit of Christian unity to 
prevail, that the church universal may better fulfill its mission in the 
world and that our common Lord — the blessed Saviour Christ be glorified. 

PAPER xin 


By Rev. J. U. Schneider. 

The Evangelical Synod of North America was organized in Gravois 
Settlement, Mo., in 1840. Its earliest pastors were missionaries who had 
gotten their training in various missionary institutions. It was the bur- 
den of their mission to serve the German immigrants who had settled in 
the Middle West and were without any spiritual ministry because of the 
lack of German clergymen in that section of the country. They came at 
the call of the German settlers and were encouraged to undertake the task 
by American Christians of English descent who very earnestly pleaded 
the cause of the German settlers. 

The German Protestant immigrants at the time of the founding of 
the Evangelical Synod and in subsequent years came from communities 
in which either the Lutheran or the Reformed Church prevailed, or the 
Evangelical Union, in which an organic union of the Churches had been 
brought about. 

In order to serve the largest number possible, the pioneers of the 
Evangelical Synod discarded the barrier of doctrine which separated 
these branches of the Church of the Reformation, " giving diligence to 
keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. One body, and one 
Spirit, even as also ye were called in one hope of your calling; one 
Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, Who is over all, 
and through all and in all." 

These words were adopted as the motto of the Synod. 

The Evangelical Synod from its very inception, therefore, advocated 
union among people with whom it labored. The names that desig- 
nated the two main branches of the Reformation in the old country 
were discarded, and Evangelical was substituted. 

The following basic principle of doctrine was adopted by the Evan- 
gelical Synod and adhered to in season and out of season to this present 

"The Evangelical Synod of North America, as a part of the Evan- 
gelical Church, defines the term l Evangelical Church' as denoting that 


branch of the Christian Church which acknowledges the Holy Scriptures 
of the Old and New Testament as the Word of God, the sole and 
infallible iguide of faith and life, and accepts the interpretation of the 
Holy Scriptures as given in the symbolic books of the Lutheran and the 
Eeformed Church, the most important being: The Augsburg Confession, 
Luther's and the Heidelberg Catechisms, in so far as they agree; but 
where they disagree the Evangelical Synod of North America adheres 
strictly to the passages of Holy Scriptures bearing on the subject, and 
avails itself of the liberty of conscience prevailing in the Evangelical 

From the foregoing it is clearly seen that the union of the Protes- 
tant Church is a thought with which the Evangelical Synod has been 
familiar throughout her existence. The Evangelical Synod therefore 
gladly welcomes the wider application of this principle and advocates an 
organic union of all the Protestant Churches that subscribe to the apos- 

As to the scheme of Government to be adopted by the organic union 
of the Protestant Churches we would suggest the adoption of a consti- 
tution providing for an Executive, a Judicial and a Legislative Depart- 
ment analogous to that of the Government of the United States. Let 
the various denominations stand in the same relation to the central church 
Government as the states stand to the Government at Washington. 

The executive to be elected by popular or electoral vote for a lim- 
ited term of years. The legislative power to be placed into the hands of 
a representative body of men composed of the clergy and laymen of the 
various denominations. This to be divided into a lower' and upper 
house (House of Eepresentatives and Senate). Eepresentation in the 
lower house to be according to a fixed ratio and equal representation 
to be given to the various denominations in the upper house. 

Arrange the Judicial Department analogous to that of the United 
States with denominational (state) courts, and a Federal (or Supreme) 

Let foreign matters — missions and all representation abroad — be the 
business of the central church government. 

By this method the Protestant Church would be united, despite 
the manifold diversity of denominational theology and custom. Closely 
related denominations would be brought still closer together and the 
number of comparatively small Church bodies would decrease. The dis- 
tressing denominational conflict in the mission fields at home and abroad 
would be removed, and the Church would present a united front to the 
world and be able to cope more successfully with the powers of dark- 
ness and bring in the glad day when: 

11 Jesus shall reign where'er the sun 
Does his successive journeys run. " 

Respectfully submitted by the delegates of the Evangelical Synod 
as their contribution to the question of organic union, subject to the 
indorsement of the General Conference of the Evangelical Synod. 




By Rev. George W. Richards, D.D. 

We shall be able to estimate aright the relative value of the present order 
in church arid state and forecast the trend of its future development 
in the light of its origin and growth. The historical background of the 
modern age is medieval Europe whose political and ecclesiastical ideal 
was a world-wide empire with a uniform government and religion for all 
the nations of the earth. In this scheme of cosmopolitanism there was 
no place for nationalism or denominationalism. It was a revival of the 
Roman empire supported by divine sanctions and clad in ecclesiastical 
robes. The two terms, descriptive of the aim and scope of pagan Rome, 
were appropriated by Christian Rome, namely — universality and eternity. 
The authority for such dominion was not based upon the consent of the 
governed but upon divine right reenforced by human might. The pur- 
pose of empire was to realize in visible form through the vicegerents 
of heaven, emperor and pope, the kingdom of God upon earth. Hence 
the name, Holy Roman Empire. Every phase of human life, politics, re- 
ligion, morals, art, philosophy, the individual and the group was regulated 
by God through His anointed. 

Uniformity of religious belief and practice, in this plan of empire, 
was more than a distant vision. It became an actual fact in medieval 
Catholicism. The Latin language was in common use in worship and in 
literature. The same holy offices were performed at every shrine from 
Bergen to Palermo, from Konigsberg to Madrid. Priests and monks 
were equally at home in every land from the North Sea to the Medi- 
terranean. Scholars wandered from Bologna to Oxford, from Paris to 
Salamanca, and heard in different universities from men of different race 
the same ideas in the same tongue. In the service of the church and in 
ecclesiastical preferment, men were not hedged in by national bound- 
aries or traditions. Gerbert, a Frenchman, became archbishop of Ra- 
venna in, Italy; Lanfranc, an Italian, became archbishop of Canterbury 
in England; the German Norbert established a new order of canons 
in Prance. Men of many nations united in the armies of the crusaders. 
The hope of a repuMica Christiana, the kingdom of God on earth ruled 
by pope and emperor in the name of Jesus Christ, was at the point of 
fulfillment when new forces came into control which wrought disintegra- 
tion and dissolution. 

Universal empire never fails to kindle the imagination and to cast a 
spell over the human spirit. Notwithstanding its repeated failures, in 
ancient and medieval times, it has been revived in so widely different 
forms as the humanitarianism of Comte, the socialism of Marx, and the 
militarism of the Hohenzollerns. The periodic revival of the dream 
of universalism in government and in religion, spite of its failures, in- 


dicates' a reason for it in the nature of things. It is an earnest, though 
misguided, attempt to put in corporate form the innate sense of the 
unity of God and of humanity, the irrepressible feeling that there is, 

"One God, one law, one element, 
And one far-off divine event, 
To which the whole creation moves." 

However sincere the attempt of uniformity of civil and religious 
institutions, it will always fail because it disregards the claims of in- 
dividualism and of nationalism, which are as deeply rooted in human na- 
ture as the aspirations to universalism. A uniform cosmopolitanism fails 
to develop the infinite variety of mental, moral, religious, political and 
aesthetic life which lies dormant in tribes and nations. 

The individual, the particular, the specific, with its priceless value, 
fascinating beauty and absorbing interest, is suppressed for the main- 
tenance of a colorless and dull uniformity. No room is left for self- 
expression and, self-realization in individual and national life, for which 
men have always become heroes and martyrs. The experience of his- 
tory assures us that an ideal born of fancy without basis in fact is un- 
real and impracticable; and efforts to enforce it in life must end in 
obscuration, distortion, and compromise. This was the outcome of the 
Holy Roman Empire, too holy to be Roman and too Roman to be holy. 
The compact between pope and emperor, vicars of Christ on earth, turned 
into bitter rivalry and deadly warfare, with victory alternating be- 
tween papal tyranny and imperial despotism. What in theory was a 
divine order of life became in practice a regime of inhumanity verging 
on brutality. 

With the dissolution of medieval uniformity came modern diversity 
— nationalism in the state, denominationalism in the church, twins born 
of the same parentage. The transition from the one to the other, was 
made in two historic movements; the Renaissance, the rediscovery of 
man, and the Reformation, the rediscovery of God. From the one came 
humanism and from the other evangelicalism, the direct opposites of 
the two controlling ideals of medieval life, universal dominion by the 
group and world renunciation by the individual. 

Renaissance and Reformation were all the more irresistible on ac- 
count of the long-felt inadequacy of the Catholie conception of life to 
satisfy the human heart. It proved, after centuries of experiment, a 
"bed shorter than that a man can stretch himself on it; and the cov- 
ering narrower than that he can wrap himself in it.'* It satisfied 
neither the progressive men of the 15th and 16th centuries nor the re- 
quirements of the New Testament. Its defect was the fatal disease of 
one-sidedness, the one-sided emphasis of the divine to the neglect of 
the human, of the institution to the neglect of the individual, of author- 
ity to the neglect of freedom. Men were the wards of the church and 
the subjects of the state. Thought and action were prescribed for 
them. But when the individual awakened to his personal rights and 


affirmed his ability to know and to do, he could not longer be curbed by 
prince or prelate. 

We shall briefly enumerate the positive forces favoring a new era. 
The Teutonic tribes gradually became mature nations, each striving for 
a political and religious order which was not simply its heritage but 
its creation. Greco-Roman culture, preserved in the Catholic Church, 
stood for authority and obedience, the exaltation of the institution and 
the repression of the individual. The Teutonic spirit aspired to free- 
dom and self-realization, the right of reason and of conscience. Teu- 
tonism and Catholicism could not permanently dwell under the same 

The new nations were stimulated to revolt, also, by the revival of 
the ancient classics. The writings of Greece and Rome expressed in 
crystal phrase the spirit that throbbed in Celt and Saxon. What the 
Greeks once did, the Teutons now desired to do. 

The rediscovery of the New Testament and the re-experience of sav- 
ing faith, sovereign grace, and the priesthood and brotherhood of be- 
lievers, had in them the dynamic of a new age — an age in which nation- 
alism took the place of cosmopolitanism and denominationalism of 
Catholicism, the one largely controlled by humanism, the other, relatively 
at least, by evangelicalism. Both were the result of individualism and 
personal freedom put in place of institutionalism and imperial author- 
ity. Individualism in its reaction against vested authority was held 
in check in the formation of new states by racial affinities and national 
traditions. But in the church it ran riot; not content with the state 
church, men organized dissenting groups within the state and regardless 
of the state. 

The new age bred its own brood of troubles. Its gains were not 
without losses, or its virtues without vices. Time came when the ills of 
nationalism and denominationalism were only little less intolerable than 
the evils of imperialism and papacy. 

Each state became a miniature empire, repudiating the age-long 
right of the conscience of united Christendom to impose restraints upon 
its will. Each state refused to recognize a law or court of final appeal, 
beyond itself, for the adjudication of international difficulties. The 
original autocracy of the middle age was broken into fragments but 
each fragment became an original autocracy as tyrannical as medieval 
sovereigns. The outcome was interminable war between the nations un- 
til Western civilization was on the verge of bankruptcy. Poets and 
philosophers sang and spoke of a return of the "good old middle age," 
the abolition of nation and sect by the revival of an imperialism and a 
catholicity of the medieval kind. 

New problems, however, cannot be solved by the easy way of the 
resuscitation of old institutions. The days of civil and religious uni- 
formity enforced by might, were forever gone. If the essential unity 
of civilization was to find political expression, it could not be done 
through the exaltation of a dominating person or race becoming the 


conscience of mankind and the arbiter of its destiny. Nor could the 
dearly bought rights of individuals and states ever again be ignored in 
a new order. Remedy for the cure of political ills must be found in 
a form of internationalism, differing widely from the homogeneous 
cosmopolitanism of ancient or medieval times. 

Its prophet was Hugo Grotius who proclaimed a law higher than the 
national will and binding on all nations, Christian or pagan. He ap- 
pealed to the law of nature of which Sophocles sings in his Antigone: 
* ' Laws that are not of to-day or yesterday but abide forever and of their 
creation knoweth no man." The Peace Palace of the Hague is the 
temple dedicated to this cause. The League to Enforce Peace is a re- 
cent organization for its effective realization. A world divided into two 
armies for more than four years, has declared by a colossal holocaust of 
men and treasure, that a universal empire, trampling upon the rights 
of nations and seeking uniformity by the stifling of nationalism, is both 
a base and a baseless dream, and that a democratic internationalism re- 
specting national rights as inviolate and making room for infinite di- 
versity in the cooperative unity of the race is the goal of evolving 

The churches of the modern age shared the spirit and the fate of 
the states. They were divided into sects and schisms each opposed to 
the other and none recognizing a common law of faith or life binding 
on all. Each was sufficient unto itself and was the arbiter of its contro- 
versies. True, all appealed to the Bible but the Bible had as many 
different meanings as interpreters. Conflicts between churches were 
fought out, though never decided, with bitter polemics by ecclesiastical 
assemblies and by ministers of the gospel. Enemies were met and dis- 
posed of by ways foul or fair. The strong had no compunctions about 
suppressing the weak, if need be, by force. Denominations, like nations, 
grew in strength by invading one another's domain. The one proselyted, 
the other conquered. Lord Acton says: "Calvin preached and Bellar- 
mine lectured but Machiavelli ruled.' ' 

For the diversity and freedom of Protestantism, men paid the price 
of sectarian warfare, Catholic against Evangelical, Lutheran against 
Calvinist, Anglican against Puritan, conformist against dissenter. For 
deliverance from paralyzing Catholic uniformity, men paid the price of 
collective action, cooperation and united effort for the kingdom of God. 
For freedom from external authority, from the grip of the dead hand, 
men paid the price of the excesses and follies of private judgment 
running into autocratic individualism or anarchy. Penance and ascet- 
icism were abolished, but in many instances without their evangelical 
equivalent in Protestant circles. 

Notwithstanding the loss incurred in going from medieval catho- 
licity to modern denominationalism, we believe the gain was greater than 
the loss and that humanity and religion took a long stride forward 
through the Reformation and the Renaissance. 

But from the beginning the nobler spirits of the age deplored sect 


and schism in the church as both unprofitable and unchristian. They 
took steps co retrieve the loss incurred through divisions. The hope of 
a reunited Protestantism, yea of a reunited Christianity, never died out 
in Melanchthon and Calvin, Bucer and Cranmer, Duraeus and Calixtus, 
Zinzendorf and Wesley. They in their sphere, like Grotius in his, caught 
a glimpse of a unity of the churches deeper than their diversity, of the 
essentials of Christianity in distinction from its doctrinal and institu- 
tional forms, of a law higher than the will of denominational judicatories, 
of a kingdom wider than any church or than all churches. In the light 
of this vision the spirit of polemics waned and the spirit of irenics 
grew. Men felt that they might differ in doctrine and yet cooperate for 
the moral and social betterment of nations. While they differed in 
creeds, their hymns and prayers were one. It was but natural that men 
would propose plans to give tangible and organized form to the grow- 
ing consciousness of Christian unity. There were those in the churches, 
as they were in the states, who attempted to heal divisions by the res- 
toration of Catholicism, medieval or ancient. But just as the ills of na- 
tionalism could not be cured by a return to cosmopolitanism, so the de- 
fects of denominationalism cannot be remedied by a restoration of Ca- 
tholicism. Nothing but a new interdenominationalism, akin to the new 
internationalism, recognizing both the unity of the spirit of Christianity 
and the diversity of its forms, conserving the freedom and personal 
initiative which go with individualism and denominationalism, and yet 
engendering cooperation in place of competition between the churches and 
the subordination of denominational welfare to the advancement of the 
kingdom of Christ upon earth — this alone will satisfy the demands of the 
Christian consciousness to-day. 

Various forms of closer relation between the churches have been 
tried, including the Evangelical Alliance, the council of churches of the 
same type, as for example, The Council of Reformed Churches holding 
the Presbyterian System throughout the World, and The Federal Council 
of the Churches of Christ in America. Yet none of these is final. There 
is an irrepressible longing for a still closer union expressed in the pro- 
posal for an Ecumenical Conference on Faith and Order, and in the 
unanimous action of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church 
in the U. S. A. inviting the evangelical churches of the U. S. to a con- 
ference on organic unity, in response to which we are here to-day. 
While statesmen on two continents are devising a new internationalism, 
churchmen are true to the spirit of the age and of their Lord, when 
they assemble to consider ways of a new interdenominationalism. For 
a new relation between nations will inevitably require, in time, a new 
relation between the churches. Again the two will be twin-born. 

The problem before us is how shall the evangelical denominations 
of America approach the question of organic union? Not by reversion 
to the doctrines, polity, or cultus of any one of them. Such a plan 
would provoke the suspicion of an unholy and unwarranted presumption. 
Not even by the proposal of a' form of faith and order, old or new, as a 


basis for the union of all churches. Such a proposal would be neither 
biological nor christological. Organic union is unthinkable save as it 
comes by organic process and not by legislative action. A new organ- 
ism must evolve, taking into itself the essential Christian elements of the 
old denominations and eliminating their ephemeral and historical forms. 
Such an evolution requires a new organic principle laying hold of the 
stuff of the several denominational organisms and uniting them, by 
transforming them after its own kind, into a new organism, greater than 
any one of them or than all of them. 

This organic principle, we believe, is the essence of evangelical 
Christianity, not of course a dogma, a polity, a cultus, or moral code. 
It is a spiritual experience born out of a sense of need — the need of the 
living God. Not indeed a new need, but an old need felt in a new way 
in the dawn of a new age. It was felt by prophet and psalmist, by 
apostle and father, by schoolman and reformer. Each answered it in 
his own way and in the light of his own day. Whenever a new vision 
ox God satisfies the cry of the awakened heart, there is a marked ad- 
vance in the history of Christianity and in the religious life of the 

As in the dawn of a new era in the 16th century so in the dawn 
of the new age in the 20th, the elemental spiritual needs of men voice 
themselves in a threefold form: the need of providence, the need of 
grace, and the need of truth or a way of life. 

In the presence of a universe with forces that devastate and destroy 
and of the evils of the individual and social life, some in the blood, 
some in the air, God needs to be justified before men as much as men need 
to be justified before God. The one is the perennial problem of theodicy, 
the other of soteriology. The Reformers found a solution, not in ancient 
philosophy, in stoical defiance, in cynical scorn, in epicurean indulgence, 
or in sceptical negation, but in childlike trust in a Christ-like God who 
upholds and controls matter and mind in the universe for the ultimate 
establishment of the reign of holy love. God is justified before men by 
faith in divine providence. 

Men, then as now, came to a new sense of sin and failure, and felt 
the need of grace the more keenly they felt the guilt of sin. The Re- 
formers were humiliated by personal sin; we, in addition, are burdened 
by sin in its overpowering social and national form. In vain do we seek 
riddance of sin by the outworn devices of men, by ignoring it, by doing 
penance for it, by forgetting it. Like the Reformers we can find peace 
only through forgiveness, in the free grace of God revealed in Christ and 
appropriated by faith. Men are justified by faith in a Christ-like God. 

Men, then as now, felt the need, not only of divine grace for the 
sinner, but of a divine life for the saved. In vain did they follow the 
traditions of the church, the example of prophets and priests, sages and 
saints, or the light of reason and the promptings of conscience. These 
were mostly blind guides leading the blind. They found a lord and 


master, as well as a savior, in the God-like-man who said: "I am the 
way, the truth and the life." 

The essence of evangelical Christianity, therefore, is a spiritual 
experience of God in Christ who satisfies the permanent three-fold need 
of the human soul by revealing a God of love who provides a God of 
grace who forgives, and a God of truth who guides. When men once have 
found Christ and direct access to God, they can no longer be human- 
ists or Catholics; not even Episcopalian or Baptist, Reformed or Pres- 
byterian, Congregational or Methodist, Disciple or Quaker, Lutheran 
or Calvinist. They can be only evangelical Christians. 

Denominational names represent groups who, with more or less 
success, have attempted to embody the evangelical spirit in intellectual 
and institutional forms. Each of them has only relatively succeeded 
and so far each has relatively failed. 

When we have a deeper and broader experience of the changeless 
evangelical realities, our ecclesiastical forms and formulas will become 
inadequate and irksome and we shall be prepared to lay them aside as 
garments that are worn out. We shall cease to pronounce denomina- 
tional shibboleths, and in the irresistible power of a new life born of 
the Holy Spirit, we shall proclaim, with heart and voice and hand, 
the evangel of Christ. 

When we are thus united by the spirit of God in hope, and faith, 
and love, then with full confidence in one another and with supreme 
loyalty to the Christ in us, we shall declare ourselves before the world, 
Tvhat we are, in fact, the united Church of Christ. Then the Lord's 
prayer for the unity of the believers will be answered — "that they may 
all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also 
may be in us. " 

After a spiritual unity of this kind is once begotten in us then we 
shall take our time, as did the fathers in ancient councils and modern 
assemblies, to work out a formula of doctrine, a system of government, a 
mode of worship, and a way of life, which will be true to the^ Christ of 
the New Testament, to the Christ in us, and to the democratic spirit of 
the age. In the meantime let us work and pray in the spirit of the 
prophets, the patience of the saints, and the courage of our Lord. 



By Rev. William A. Freemantle 

The Reformed Episcopal Church has set forth its views on the sub- 
ject of organic unity in the several actions taken by its General Coun- 
cils to wit: In 1912 a commission on church union was appointed to 
prepare a statement setting forth the doctrine, polity and order of 
worship of the Reformed Episcopal Church as a contribution toward the 
finding of a practical basis of union of the several evangelical branches 


of the church of Christ and to confer officially or unofficially with com- 
missions or committees of other denominations. That commission on 
union in May, 1918, brought before the General Council a recommenda- 
tion that we petition the supreme judicatory or association of every 
church in the United States of America, which is founded upon Christ 
the Son of the Living God, to appoint two delegates to a preliminary 
conference which shall be charged with the work of drawing up pro- 
posals for a constitutional convention on organic union. This report 
was received but not adopted because of the action of the General As- 
sembly of the Presbyterian Church in, the U. S. A. at whose invitation 
we are gathered together now. 

This has been the attitude of the Reformed Episcopal Church from 
its foundation, for Bishop George David Cummins declared that the 
Reformed Episcopal Church "is a witness to-day to the true unity of 
all Christ's people. It is a step toward the union or reunion of all 
evangelical Christendom. It is a protest and a revolt against the ex- 
clusiveness of the dogma that would limit the church of Christ to one 
ecclesiastical polity, that denies a place or a portion in the holy catho- 
lic church to all who do not submit to prelates claiming to rule by di- 
vine right, lords over God's heritage." 

In its attitude to organic union the Reformed Episcopal Church has 
from its foundation occupied a mediating position between Anglicanism 
and other Protestant communions. In support of this statement we 
cite the following facts: 

1. Our church recognizes the validity of the ministry of all other 
evangelical churches, both in theory and practice. Our church is gov- 
erned by bishops who are in the same line of succession — we are not 
now discussing its value — as those of the Anglican communion. Yet 
Article XXIV says: "This church values its historic ministry, but 
recognizes and honors as equally valid the ministry of other churches, 
even as God the Holy Ghost has accompanied their words with demon- 
stration and power. " This article is no dead letter for our canon de- 
clares: "The ecclesiastical parity of presbyters of this church, whether 
ordained episcopally or otherwise, being a fundamental principle of 
this church, no presbyter coming from an evangelical church into this 
church, who has been previously set apart and formally ordained to the 
ministry of the Gospel, shall be reordained by the authorities of this 
church. ' ' 

A further instance of our insistence upon the validity of the min- 
istry of other evangelical churches is found in the annual custom of our 
church to promote on Maundy Thursday the holding of union communion 
services at which time ministers of other evangelical churches are not 
only urged to participate in the distribution of the sacred elements but 
also to offer the prayer of consecration of those elements. We make 
bold to put this item first because the ministry and its functions consti- 
tute in some quarters the crucial point in this matter of reunion. 

2. Such a conception of the ministry issues in a clearly-defined 


attitude to all evangelical churches. While it is our custom to receive 
members into our church by the rite of confirmation, which administra- 
tion is confined to the bishops, not as of divine right, but as a very- 
ancient and desirable form of church usage, the rubric at the end of 
the order of confirmation emphatically declares that " members of other 
churches, uniting with this church, need not be confirmed except at 
their own request. This position is further emphasized at each celebra- 
tion of the Holy Communion, at which the minister " shall give the 
following or similar invitation: " "Our fellow Christians of other 
branches of Christ's church, and all who love our divine Lord and 
Saviour, Jesus Christ, in sincerity are affectionately invited to the 
Lord's Table/ » 

3. The same' broad attitude appears toward the Sacrament of 
Baptism. "The Baptism of young children is retained in this church, 
as agreeable to ancient usage and not contrary to Holy Writ;" but 
"one at least of the persons presenting 'such children' must be a 
communicant of this or some other evangelical church." But our 
church also allows baptism by immersion, as also for those of riper 
years, while it "does not require any who do not believe in infant 
baptism to have their children baptized" but offers the opportunity for 
any who conscientiously hold this position to present their children to 
the Lord by a service of dedication. 

4. Our Church is a Liturgical church, using a revision of the Book 
of Common Prayer, freed from all tendencies that would foster sacer- 
dotalism, and based upon the Bishop White's Prayer Book of 1785. The 
order of morning prayer is made by canon law obligatory, though even 
in this service place is allowed for extemporaneous prayer. Evening 
prayer though provided, is not obligatory, and the practice of extem- 
poraneous prayer on all occasions of public and private worship is not 
only allowed but encouraged. Happily it has become a habit among us 
and both forms of worship are freely enjoyed by our people. 

5. Doctrinally our church leans strongly towards Calvinism but 
maintains, we believe, an almost unique position as set forth in the 
articles of religion (XVIII) declaring: "While the Scriptures distinctly 
set forth the election, predestination and calling of the people of God 
unto eternal life, as Christ saith: 'All that the Father giveth me shall 
come to me,' they no less positively affirm man's free agency and respon- 
sibility and that salvation is offered freely to all through Jesus Christ. 
This church accordingly affirms both these doctrines as the Word of God 
sets them forth, and submits them to the individual judgment of its 
members, as taught by the Holy Spirit; strictly charging them that God 
commandeth all men everywhere to repent and that we can be saved 
only by faith in Jesus Christ." 

6. While rejoicing in the comprehensiveness of our church such 
comprehensiveness has not issued in any laxity in holding the fundamen- 
tal doctrines of the evangelical faith. Concerning the inspiration of the 
Scriptures, the deity of Jesus Christ, the absolute necessity of atonement 


through the shed blood of Christ and that salvation is by grace through 
faith in Christ alone — concerning these things we know no breadth for 
we cannot deny the validity of our own experience through the opera- 
tion of the Holy Spirit. 

7. The positions taken and the statements made in this brief are 
but the natural outcome of the 

Declaration op Principles op the Reformed Episcopal Church 
Adopted December 2d, 1873. 


The Reformed Episcopal Church, holding "the faith once delivered 
unto the saints/ ' declares its belief in the Holy Scriptures of the Old 
and New Testaments as the Word of God, and the sole rule of faith 
and practice; in the creed "commonly called the Apostles' Creed;'' in 
the divine institution of the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Sup- 
per; and in the doctrines of grace substantially as they are set forth in 
the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion. 


This Church recognizes and adheres to episcopacy, not as of divine 
right, but as a very ancient and desirable form of church polity. 


This Church, retaining a liturgy which shall not be imperative or 
repressive of freedom in prayer, accepts the Book of Common Prayer, 
as it was revised, proposed and recommended for use by the General 
Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church, A. D. 1785, reserving 
full liberty to alter, abridge, enlarge, and amend the same, as may seem 
most conducive; to the edification of the people, "provided that the sub- 
stance of the faith be kept entire." 


This Church condemns and rejects the following erroneous and 
strange doctrines as contrary to God's Word; 

First, That the church of Christ exists only in one order or form 
of ecclesiastical polity: 

Second, That Christian ministers are "priests" in another sense 
than that in which all believers are "a royal priesthood:" 

Third, That the Lord's Table is an altar on which the oblation of 
the body and blood of Christ is offered anew to the Father: 

Fourth, That the presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper is a 
presence in the elements of bread and wine: 

Fifth, That regeneration is inseparably connected with Baptism. 




By Rev. W. P. Funk, DJ>. 

{Bead by Rev. TJ. G. Clippenger, D.D.) 

The United Brethren Church was born in a spirit of fellowship and love. 
Just outside this city a few miles, Phillip William Otterbein listened 
to a wonderful sermon by Martin Boehm of another church, and at its 
close, rose and embracing him cried, "We are brethren.*' That event 
occurred in 1766, and from that time to the close of the eighteenth cen- 
tury, and far into the nineteenth century, the leaders of our communion 
contributed unselfishly their efforts to the promotion of religious thought 
and Christian service without any definite plan of organization. 

Therefore, the commissioners from our church feel it a distinct privi- 
lege to be permitted to sit in the councils of this body of denominational 
leaders to think with you on this important subject of the unity of the 
church of Christ. 

There is special joy in our hearts for, as a denomination, we have 
been committed to the principle of union for a long while. Indeed, 
we claim, with others, to be pioneers in praying, studying, and working 
with definite ends in view. Our church will never forget the days of 
fellowship in the many meetings when the splendid leaders of the Con- 
gregational and Methodist Protestant churches gave themselves with us 
to the effort of union. The coming of such great men as Drs. William 
Hayes Ward and Washington Gladden of the Congregational churches, 
and Drs. Stephens and Davis of the Methodist Protestant Church gave 
us inspiration and encouragement, and now their words and spirit seem 
like a benediction without end. 

Our experience in an effort to reach organic union was not without 
pain to us, for we failed to consummate the act; yet the United Brethren 
Church is richer, better, and stronger, because of its contact with the 
brethren of the other churches and we declare that the historic Tri- 
Council of the Congregational, Methodist Protestant and United Breth- 
ren Churches was not in vain. 

We failed in a later effort at union with the Methodist Protestant 
church. It is our candid belief that it was because the movement was 
too small to challenge the heroic in the membership of our communion. 
It is hard for two small churches to get together. 

This movement is different. It will command the attention and ap- 
proval of our people. It is well it should; for we have a democratic form 
of government and the power in our organization is in the people. 
While we have bishops, they are not a separate order, but are elected 
quadrennially by representatives of the people, and are superintendents, 
rather than bishops. Our membership has sought rest from further un- 
ion agitation for the present, but this does not mean that we have ceased 
to hope or pray for the day when His people shall be one in service. It 


does mean that we are abiding the will of God and stand at " atten- 
tion," ready to step with Him in the onward movement toward organic 

Brethren, let the Army of the Lord move, and our regiment — not 
very large, but virile in spirit and well equipped with a good efficiency 
for service — is ready to fall in line at the proper time. 

Our Commission on Federation and Union would say to you that we 
have had a healthy growth in membership, now numbering 350,000, in 
organization and practical activities. We have made rapid strides re- 
cently in the endowment of our educational institutions and are now 
planning a new forward movement, which we hope will "bring at least 
ten millions of dollars to our benevolent boards in the next five years. 

We crave your acquaintanceship. We think it will lead to fellow- 
ship, and we trust that fellowship will ripen into love, and love and 
cooperation into ultimate union. 

You must not expect our people to move rapidly. The experiences 
of the past will make them conservative. But we are receptive; some 
of us think that, if the Tri-Council had gone more slowly, the result 
would have been different and a union of the Congregational, the Method- 
ist-Protestant, and the United Brethren churches consummated. We 
were all too zealous, and the end too devoutly desired. So in this effort, 
we counsel against haste. 

Let me end by saying, that we will do anything possible, as com- 
missioners, to bring about the object set forth in the call for this im- 
portant gathering. We will certainly be one of the units in this co- 
operative movement under a controlling body until such time as we can 
all merge into an adequate central organization. 

Hence, as a church, we stand ready to accept the challenge of this 
great new day to fellowship, to brotherhood, to federation, to coopera- 
tion, and ultimate organic union. 

PAPER xvn 

By Rev. A. C. Thomas 

Brethren of the Conference, Greeting: 

By the request of your* honored president, William H. Roberts, D.D., 
I submit herewith a brief statement of the doctrine to which as an or- 
ganized body of Christian believers we hold. 

First: We believe in the unity or oneness of the church of Christ. 

Second: Christ the only head of the church. 

Third: The Bible, including the Old and New Testaments, as the 
Word of God, is a sufficient rule for both faith and practice. 

Fourth: Christian character and good fruits alone should be the 
test of fellowship between Christians. 


We are evangelical, believe in genuine repentance of sin, faith in 
Jesus Christ as G-od's only Son and our Redeemer. 

We believe in the atoning merit of Jesus' blood, the personality and 
office work of the Holy Spirit in the regeneration of the soul. 

Our only mission as a people, distinct from other churches, as we 
believe, is to preach the need and practicability of organic union of all 

I come to you as the president of the National Council of Christian 
Union, desiring to have an humble part in your deliberations and to 
render any small service of which I may be able to assist you in your 
efforts to effect an organic union of the churches and to learn from 
you what you may have to impart that will help me and the people 
whom I represent to a larger field of usefulness. 

My prayers and sympathy are with you in your efforts to get to- 

I will sincerely thank you for any courtesies extended. 

Christian union or the oneness of the church of Christ is a great 
truth taught and practiced by Christ and His apostles. 

On the third day of February, 1864, a convention of Christian peo- 
ple of various denominations was held in the city of Columbus, Ohio, the 
object of which was to inquire what steps should be taken in order to 
provide for the religious wants of a large portion of earnest Christian 
men and women who desired a more perfect fellowship in Christ. 

This consultation resulted in the conviction that it had become 
necessary for those who desired a pure gospel and a true Christian life 
to unite for the purpose of a common worship, and to that end the follow- 
ing basis of union was drawn up and subscribed to : 

1 ' Having a desire for a more perfect fellowship in Christ and a more 
satisfactory enjoyment of the means of religious edification and comfort 
we do solemnly form ourselves into a religious society under the style 
of 'The Christian Union, ' in which we avow one true and hearty faith 
in the received Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as the Word 
of God and the only and sufficient rule of faith and practice, and pledge 
ourselves 'through Christ who strengtheneth us' to keep and observe all 
things whatsoever He hath commanded us." 

To the end that this solemn compact and fellowship might not be 
disturbed or broken, they set forth the following declaration of prin- 
ciples, to wit: 

"(1) The oneness of the church of Christ. 
"(2) Christ the only head of the church. 
"(3) The Bible a sufficient rule of faith and practice. 
"(4) Christian character and good fruits the only conditions of 

"(5) Christian union without controversy. 
"(6) Each local church governs itself. 
"(7) Partisan preaching discountenanced. ' ' 


We have at this time about 20,000 communicants, 225 local churches, 
and about two hundred licensed and ordained preachers. We have in 
one communion Dunkards, Baptists, Disciples, Methodists, Presbyterians, 
Friends, United Brethren, and almost all other evangelical churches are 
represented but with them all and their individual beliefs there is per- 
fect harmony and the sweetest fellowship. We have a democratic form of 

The local church governs itself in the conduct of its own affairs. 
The district, state and national councils are delegated bodies composed 
of ministers and laymen. The state and national councils are legislative 
as well as advisory just as in our national government. The municipal 
and state organizations are independent, yet the lesser is subordinate 
to the greater. I do not wish you to become confused about the name. 

We are not the Christian Union Church as some call us, but we are 
Christians in Christian union. We call the local congregation a church 
of Christ, not the church of Christ, and Christian union the principle or 
basis upon which we unite and cooperate. 

We offer this brief statement setting forth the principles of one 
movement as a proven practical basis upon which we believe it is pos- 
sible for all Christians of every name and order to unite in fellowship 
and cooperate. 

The July Number of The Christian 
Union Quarterly is tendered for dis- 
cussion of plans and propositions so 
far presented as regards organic union, 
letters to the editor to be limited to 
five hundred words. 

a& a& &G 


1 C 9?S?™ Wil ^ QUAR TERLY